DOCUMENT RESUME ED 364 857 CS 011 498 INSTITUTION · 2014. 5. 5. · DOCUMENT RESUME ED 364 857 CS...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 364 857 CS 011 498

TITLE Manitoba Reading Assessment 1992. French ImmersionProgram: Grades 4, 8, 11. Final Report.

INSTITUTION Manitoba Dept. of Education and Training, Winnipeg.Curriculum Services Branch.

REPORT NO ISBN-0-7711-1167-3PUB DATE Sep 93NOTE 248p.; For a similar study on Franco-Manitoban

Schools, see CS 011 497; for a study on EnglishLanguage Schools, see CS 011 499.

PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical (143)

EDRS PRICE MFOI/PC10 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Curriculum Evaluation; Elementary School Students;

Foreign Countries; French; *Immersion Programs;Intermediate Grades; *Language Arts; *ReadingAchievement; *Reading Attitudes; Reading Research;Secondary Education; Secondary School Students;Student Attitudes; *Student Evaluation; *TeacherAttitudes; Teacher Behavior

IDENTIFIERS *Manitoba

ABSTRACTA study assessed the strengths, weaknesses, and

degree of implementation of the reading dimension in the EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum in grades 4, 8, and 11 of English languageschools in Manitoba, Canada. At each grade, the student test assessedfive major areas of reading performance. Assessment materialsconsisted of a student test, a studret reading survey, and a teachersurvey. Results for the French Immersion program indicated that: (1)

students at all grades demonstrated a high rate of response on thefive subtests; (2) curriculum objectives related to literalcomprehension in reading were satisfactorily achieved across allthree grades; (3) many grade 8 and 11 students demonstrateddifficulty in performing specific kinds of inferential reading tasks;(4) students had insufficient awareness of the variety of strategiesavailable in constructing meaning from text; (5) students rated theirreading abilities positively; (6) over nine-tenths of the teachersrated themselves as qualified or very qualified; (7) teachers felt ingreater need of professional development in practical applicationareas than in theory-related areas; (8) teachers reported using avariety of different materials, although materials appeared to beinsufficiently balanced; and (9) teachers at each grade levelreported using a variety of teaching strategies. Recommendationssuggest that: educators have access to and make regular use ofcurriculum documents; students be given access to a wide variety ofappropriate reading materials; and educators be informed and broughtup to date on current research. (One hundred tables of data areincluded; four appendixes of data, scoring procedures, committeemembers, and a 34-item bibliography are attached.) (RS)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

MANITOBA READINGASSESSMENT 1992

FINAL REPORT

French Immersion Program

U I. DEPARTMENT Or EDUCATIONOPc or Educe tonal Ref Welch and Imor Comment

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER IERIC)

1rs document has been reproduced asrenewed from the person Or Orpentlebonor,pmatmg .1

0 !Amor changes hay* been made to 1471p/ofteprOductOrt Quaid),

Oomts °lyre* or opuliOnS elated onlha 00Comini do not neCeseenly represent offictaIOE RI poorton or policy

ManitobaEducationand Training l

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

2

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

CS

MANITOBA READING ASSESSMENT 1992

FINAL REPORT

French Immersion Program

Grades 4, 8, 11

A REPORT OF THE

CURRICULUM SERVICES BRANCH

MANITOBA EDUCATION AND TRAINING

S

I

371.26097127Manitoba reading assessment, 1992.

Final report : French immersionprogram : grades 4, 8, 11

ISBN 0-7711-1167-3

1. Reading--Manitoba--Abilitytesting. 2. Reading (Elementary)-Manitoba. 3. Reading (Secondary)-Manitoba. 4. Educational tests andmeasurements--Manitoba. I. Manitoba.Curriculum Services Branch. II. Manitoba.Dept. of Education and Training.

Winnipeg, Manitoba September, 1993

ePREFACE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

LIST OF TABLES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CHAPTER 1 Manitoba Reading Assessment 1992: Overview 1

CHAPTER 2 Student Test and Reading Survey Results (Grade 4) 9

CHAPTER 3 Teacher Survey Results (Grade 4) 37

CHAPTER 4 Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendations (Grade 4) . . 55



CHAPTER 7 Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendations (Grade 8) . . 117



CHAPTER 10 Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendations (Grade 11) . 181

CHAPTER 11 Comparison Testing Results 205

Reading Continuum Rating Results (Grade 4) 205

Comparison of 1985 and 1992 ReadingAssessment Results 208

soiii

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

APPENDICES Appendix A: Grade 4 Provincial Student Sampleand Return Rate

Page

211

Appendix B: Grade 8 Provincial Student Sampleand Return Rate 212

Appendix C: Grade 11 Provincial Student Sampleand Return Rate 213

Appendix D: Teacher Survey: Sample and Return Rates . . . 214

Appendix E: Procedures for Scoring Open-EndedResponse Items 215

Appendix F: Members of the Technical Advisory Committee(Grade 4) 219

Appendix G: Members of the Technical Advisory Committee(Grade 8) 221

Appendix H: Members of the Technical Advisory Committee(Grade 11) 222

BIBLIOGRAPHY 223

iv


PREFACE

The Manitoba Reading Assessment was conducted from May 25 to 29, 1992, in Englishlanguage schools, Franco-Manitoban schools and the French Immersion program. Tests wereadministered to grade 4, grade 8 and grade 11 students. Teacher surveys were also administeredto a sample of teachers at the same grade levels in each of the three client groups. Grade 4English Language Arts teachers also performed a reading continuum rating of the students whohad been selected to participate in the 1992 provincial Reading Assessment. In addition,comparison testing in reading was conducted at grades 3, 6, 9 and 12 from May 11 to 15, 1992,using the 1985 tests.

A Preliminary Report containing provincial data on the student test results for 1992 was preparedfor each of the three grades and client groups following the scoring and coding of test results.These preliminary reports were distributed to appropriate schools and school divisions inNovember, 1992.

This Final Report of the 1992 Manitoba Reading Assessment provides a description of allcomponents of the study, and an interpretation and discussion of the results. It also presents theconclusions and recommendations resulting from a review and interpretation of the findings byEnglish Language Arts educators on the grade level Technical Advisory Committees. Separatereports were prepared for the three client groups.

The Reading Assessment results presented in the Final Report should be reviewed in conjunctionwith the relevant assessment materials (student question booklets, reading selections, surveyquestionnaires, administration manuals and scoring keys) which were sent to schools and schooldivisions prior to the administration of the assessment. Additional copies of these materials areavailable from the Manitoba Text Book Bureau.

It is important that educational leaders ensure that educators have a forum for meaningfuldiscussion of the 1992 Reading Assessment findings which resulted in man" useful suggestionsand recommendations regarding English Language Arts curriculum delivery.

7


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This assessment could not have been conducted without the invaluable assistance of a great manypeople. Although all cannot be named here, thanks are extended to the students who took thewritten test and the teachers who administered it, the individuals who participated in pilot tests,and the teachers and advisors who worked on developing the objectives that were ultimatelyutilized in the assessment.

The following individuals and groups deserve particular thanks:

Members of the Technical Advisory Committees for advice throughoutthe process of creating tests and analyzing results;

The test developers for the benefit of their skills during various stages ofthe project;

Report writer, Susan Rempel Letkemann, for her writing, analytical andorganizational skills;

The teachers for participating in the teacher survey;

The schools and school divisions for assistance in conducting theassessment; and

The secretaries of Manitoba Education and Training for excellent workpreparing documents for publication.

vii


LIST OF TABLES

Page

Overview

Table 1 Reading Assessment (1992): Provincial Sample 1

Table 2 Teacher Survey (1992): Provincial Sample 2

Grade 4 French Immersion Program

Table 3 Meaning Vocabulary Subtest Means 11

Table 4 Meaning Vocabulary Multiple-Choice Items 11

Table 5 Literal Comprehension Subtest Means 13Table 6 Literal Comprehension Multiple-Choice Items 14Table 7 Literal Comprehension Open-Ended Items 15Table 8 interpretive Comprehension Subtest Means 18Table 9 Interpretive Comprehension Multiple-Choice and Open-Ended Items . 18Table 10 Critical-Reflective Comprehension Subtest Means 20Table 11 Critical-Reflective Comprehension Multiple-Choice

and Open-Ended Items 21Table 12 Reading Strategies and Process Skills

Multiple-Choice, Dichotomous and Open-Ended Items 24Table 13 Pre-Reading Strategies 25Table 14 During-Reading Strategies 26Table 15 Post-Reading Strategies 28Table 16 Students' Self-Assessment As Readers 31Table 17 Personal Importance of Reading 32Table 18 Frequency of Oral Reading Experiences 33Table 19 Frequency of Shared and Extended Reading Experiences 34Table 20 Teacher-Facilitated Use of Reading Strategies 35Table 21 Teachers' Self-Rated Knowledge of Reading Instruction 39Table 22 Teacher Rating of Professional Development Topics 40Table 23 School Organization Profile (1991-1992) 43Table 24 Teacher Influence Over Decisions Concerning the Teaching of

English Language Arts 44Table 25 Teacher Rating of Availability of Support Services in Schools 45Table 26 Availability and Teacher Use of Curriculum Documents 46Table 27 Teacher Rating of Need for Revision of Curriculum Documents 47Table 28 Teaching Materials Used in Reading/English

Language Arts Program (1991-1992) 48Table 29 Teacher Rating of Access to and Content of Teaching Materials 49Table 30 Teaching Strategies Used in Reading/English Language Arts

Program 50Table 31 Teacher Rating of Importance of Reading Program Components 51Table 32 Teacher Rating of Importance of Evaluation Products and Processes 52

ix

9Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd.)

PageGrade 8 French Immersion Program

Table 33 Meaning Vocabulary Subtest Means 77Table 34 Meaning Vocabulary Multiple-Choice Items 77Table 35 Literal Comprehension Subtest Means 79Table 36 Literal Comprehension Multiple-Choice and Open-Ended Items 79Table 37 Interpretive Comprehension Subtest Means 82Table 38 Interpretive Comprehension Multiple-Choice Items 82Table 39 Interpretive Comprehension Open-Ended Items 84Table 40 Critical-Reflective Comprehension Subtest Means 86Table 41 Critical-Reflective Comprehension Multiple-Choice and

Open-Ended Items 86Table 42 Reading Strategies and Process Skills Subtest Means 89Table 43 Reading Strategies and Process Skills 89

Table 44 Students' Self-Assessment As Readers 92Table 45 Source of Reading Material 93Table 46 Type of Material Students Read Out of School 93Table 47 Type of Material Students Read In School 94Table 48 Frequency of Communication About Reading 96Table 49 Frequency of Extended Reading Activities 97Table 50 Students' Use of Reading Strategies 97Table 51 Teacher-Facilitated Use of Reading Strategies in

English Language Arts Classes 98Table 52 Teachers' Self-Rated Knowledge of Reading Instruction 101

Table 53 Teacher Rating of Professional Development Topics 102

Table 54 School Organization Profile (1991-1992) 105

Table 55 Teacher Influence Over Decisions Concerning the Teaching ofEnglish Language Arts 106

Table 56 Teacher Rating of Availability of Support Services in Schools 107

Table 57 Availability and Teacher Use of Curriculum Documents 108

Table 58 Teacher Rating of Need for Revision of English Language Arts:Middle Years 109

Table 59 Teaching Materials Used in Reading/EnglishLanguage Arts Program (1991-1992) 110

Table 60 Teacher Rating of Access to and Content of Teaching Materials 111

Table 61 Teaching Strategies Used in Reading/English Language ArtsProgram 112

Table 62 Teacher Rating of Importance of Reading Program Components 113

Table 63 Teacher Rating of Importance of Evaluation Products and Processes 114

Reading Finn! Report, French Immersion Program !0

I


Page

Grade 11 French Immersion Program

Table 64 Meaning Vocabulary Subtest Means 137

Table 65 Meaning Vocabulary Multiple-Choice Items 137

Table 66 Literal Comprehension Subtest Means 140

Table 67 Literal Comprehension Multiple-Choice Items 140

Table 68 Interpretive Comprehension Subtest Means 143

Table 69 Interpretive Comprehension Multiple-Choice Items 143

Table 70 Interpretive Comprehension Open-Ended Items 145

Table 71 Critical-Reflective Comprehension Subtest Means 147

Table 72 Critical-Reflective Comprehension Multiple-Choice Items 147

Table 73 Critical-Reflective Comprehension Open-Ended Items 149

Table 74 Reading Strategies and Process Skills Subtest Means 152

Table 75 Reading Strategies and Process Skills 153

Table 76 Students' Self-Assessment As Readers 155

Table 77 Materials Read for Pleasure/Personal Interest 156

Table 78 Reading for Personal Pleasure:Source of Materials and Preferred Reading Location 157

Table 79 Amount of Time Spent Reading Per Week 158

Table 80 Frequency of Discussion Regarding Pleasure Reading 159

Table 81 Frequency of Shared and Extended Reading Activities 160

Table 82 Teacher-Facilitated Use of Reading Strategiesin English Language Arts Classes 161

Table 83 Student Use of Reading Strategies 162

Table 84 Teachers' Self-Rated Knowledge of Current Reading Instruction 165

Table 85 Teacher Rating of Professional Development Topics 166

Table 86 School Organization Profile (1991-1992) 168

Table 87 Teacher Influence Over Decisions Concerning the Teaching ofEnglish Language Arts 169

Table 88 Teacher Rating of Availability of Support Services in Schools 170

Table 89 Availability and Teacher Use of Curriculum Documents 171

Table 90 Teaching Materials Used in Reading/English Language ArtsProgram (1991-1992) 173

Table 91 Teacher Rating of Access to and Content of Teaching Materials 174

Table 92 Teaching Strategies Used in Reading/English Language ArtsProgram 175

Table 93 Teacher Rating of Importance of Reading Program Components 177

Table 94 Teacher Rating of Importance of Evaluation Products and Processes 178

xi



PageComparison Testing

Table 95 Teacher Familiarity with and Use of Reading Continua 206Table 96 Reading Continuum Rating 207Table 97 Comparison of 1985 and 1992 Reading Assessment Results

Grade 3 208Table 98 Comparison of 1985 and 1992 Reading Assessment Results



Grade 12 210

xii


12

a

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In the spring of 1992, Manitoba Education and Training conducted a provincial readingassessment to assess the strengths, weaknesses and degree of implementation of the readingdimension in the English Language Arts curriculum in grades 4, 8 and 11. Students participatingin this assessment were drawn from three client groups: English language schools, Franco-Manitoban schools and the French Immersion program. At each grade, the student test assessedfive major areas of reading performance. The assessment materials consisted of a student test,a student reading survey and a teacher survey.

The following table indicates the mean scores achieved by students in the five major areas ofreading assessed in the French Immersion program.

MEAN SCORES BY READING OBJECTIVES AT GRADES 4, 8 AND 11

READING OBJECTIVES

SUBTEST MEAN PERCENTAGE SCORES

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 11

Meaning Vocabulary 79.13% 82.57% 68.39%Literal Comprehension 76.14 80.33 85.49Interpretive Comprehension 74.85 64.49 59.68Critical-Reflective Comprehension 60.33 58.28 59.16Reading Strategies and Process Skills *N/A 58.49 77.97

* Mean score not available because reading strategies and process skills items at grade 4 werenot designed to be scored right or wrong.

A review of the 1992 Reading Assessment results reveals consistent patterns across all threegrades. The major findings of the test and survey results for the French Immersion program arehighlighted in the following summary.

TEST RESULTS

Student Responses

Students at all grades demonstrated a high rate of response on each of the five subtests. Meanscores were higher on multiple-choice questions than on open-ended questions where studentswere required to provide their own answers. A large percentage of student responses to open-ended questions demonstrated a limited or partial understanding of the tasks and the readings inthe student tests.

3


Meaning Vocabulary

Students at each of the three grades were generally better able to understand words whosemeaning was explicitly stated in the text as compared to words which required students to infermeaning from implicit contextual clues and/or from experience. This suggests that instructionalefforts need to be directed toward teaching and learning experiences which will enhancestudents' ability to use implicit contextual clues in understanding word meaning.

Literal Comprehension

Curriculum objectives related to literal comprehension in reading were satisfactorily achievedacross all three grades. A large majority of students demonstrated proficiency in deriving literalmeaning from various types of reading materials. There are indications, however, that studentshave insufficient skills and/or experience in adapting their reading strategies to suit various typesof reading materials. For students in grades 4 and 8, this deficiency is most pronounced inrelation to specific types of expository text. Grade 11 students appear to have a great deal ofdifficulty in responding to questions which require the application of a range of thinkingstrategies to problem-solving.

Interpretive Comprehension

Students in grade 4 tended to perform almost equally well on both the Literal Comprehensionand Interpretive Comprehension subtests. In contrast, the performance of students in grades 8and 11 was significantly lower on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest than on the LiteralComprehension subtest. Many grade 8 and grade 11 students demonstrated difficulty inperforming specific kinds of inferential reading tasks. It appears that many grade 8 students lackthe cognitive strategies required to differentiate between implicitly stated text and explicitlystated text, or to sort relevant from irrelevant data.

Grade 8 students had considerable difficulty interpreting the poetry selection. These students alsodemonstrated difficulty in manipulating statistical information presented in a table. Grade 11students tended to perform well on a number of multiple-choice questions related to narrativetext. Generally, the subtest results indicate that grade 11 students have considerable difficultywith reading tasks involving an interpretation of stylistic elements of text, particulary the use oftone in expository materials. These results suggest a need for greater instructional emphasis onlearning experiences which emphasize reading, thinking and responding to transactional text.

xiv


4

Critical-Reflective Comprehension

Although the mean performance at each grade was lower on the Critical-ReflectiveComprehension subtest than on any of the other subtests, the results reflect some promisingdevelopments in students' ability to explore and evaluate the implications of a variety of texts.

The high rate of complete and partial responses (combined with the attempted, but incorrectresponses) indicates that nearly all students were attempting to interact with various readingmaterials at a critical-reflective level, and a large majority were fully or partially successful intheir attempt. Many students, however, appear to have insufficient skills and/or experience inprocessing their thinking fully at this cognitive level and/or in supporting and elaborating theirthinking. The subtest results, particularly at grade 4, do not demonstrate conclusively whetherstudents were encountering limitations in their critical-reflective comprehension or strugglingwith the expression of their thinking in the form of written responses. The relatively weakperformance on the Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest may indicate a need for moreextensive interactive reading/learning experiences which promote the development of higher-order thinking.

Reading Strategies and Process Skills

A review of the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest results for each grade reveals thatstudents have insufficient awareness of the variety of strategies available to them in constructingmeaning from text. Grade 8 students appear to have the greatest difficulty processing certaintypes of expository text.

STUDENT READING SURVEY RESULTS

Students rated their reading abilities positively. Nearly all students reported reading for personalenjoyment outside of school. In identifying their choice of reading materials, grades 8 and 11students expressed their strongest preference for magazines, while grade 4 students were mostinclined to read adventure and mystery stories. Most students in grades 8 and 11 indicated theyspend their own money on reading materials and share or exchange reading materials withothers. Only a small majority of grade 11 students reported using libraries to obtain personalinterest reading materials.

Despite the curriculum emphasis on discussion, group work, and co-operative and collaborativelearning experiences, a large proportion of students reported limited participation ininteractive/shared and extended reading activities. The majority of students in grades 8 and 11perceived themselves as having a limited degree of choice in the selection of reading materialsexplored in the English Language Arts program. These same students revealed that few of themregularly practice the range of reading strategies which characterize strong readers. Students atall grades reported limited teacher-facilitated use of pre-reading strategies.

xv


TEACHER SURVEY RESULTS

Teacher Training and Professional Development

Over nine-tenths of the teachers completing the Teacher Questionnaire rated themselves asqualified or very qualified to teach English Language Arts at their current grade level. Grades4, 8 and 11 teachers respectively reported a median of 9, 14 and 18 years teaching experiencein total, and a median of 5, 5 and 11 years teaching English Language Arts at Early, Middle andSenior Years. Nearly all teachers observed changes in their teaching practice during the last fiveyears, the majority attributing these changes to the influence of professional developmentopportunities and to their own professional reading or study.

Of the relatively small percentage of teachers who provided information on their academictraining, few had acquired recent training in English, the teaching of English Language Arts,and the teaching of reading. Teachers at each grade level reported a median of ten hours ofprofessional development in reading /English Language Arts for the last five years.Approximately half the grade 4 teachers and over half the grades 8 and 11 teachers noted thateducational leaders in their schools infrequently or never refer to or encourage the reading ofprofessional literature about reading/language arts.

The survey data indicate that teachers feel in greater need of professional development inpractical application areas than in theory-related areas. Evaluation techniques for reading andstrategies for specific types of text and reading processes, including content area readingstrategies, were identified as areas of strong need. The teachers' ratings regarding the extent oftheir understanding of various areas of reading instruction currently emphasized in thecurriculum indicate that grades 8 and 11 teachers have the most extensive knowledge of contentarea reading and reading/writing portfolios, and grade 4 teachers have the greatest knowledgeof whole language and language across the curriculum.

School Organization

Approximately a third of the grade 4 teachers, three-fifths of the grade 8 teachers and four-fifthsof the grade 11 teachers indicated they were teaching English Language Arts at their currentgrade by choice, the remainder indicating they were doing so by negotiated choice orassignment.

A substantial majority of teachers at all levels perceived themselves as having extensive influenceover decisions directly related to the teaching of English Language Arts. Fewer than a third ofteachers, however, reported having great influence over discussions related to the kind ofprofessional development made available to them and the selection of material added to theschool library.

xvi


The Curriculum

Only a small percentage of teachers professed to make frequent (weekly/monthly) use of theEnglish Language Arts curriculum documents for their respective grades, yet nearly all teachersrated their knowledge of the documents as adequate or very adequate. Furthermore, virtually allconsidered themselves to have an adequate or highly adequate understanding of what studentsat the given grade level should be doing in English Language Arts and of the teaching strategiesappropriate for that level.

Teaching Materials

Teachers reported using a variety of different materials in the reading/English Language Artsprogram at each grade; however, the range of materials used in teaching appears to beinsufficiently balanced. More than two-thirds of all survey respondents noted they are able topurchase materials not on the authorized list from the Manitoba Text Book Bureau catalogue.Only a little over a quarter of the grade 11 teachers and approximately a fifth of the grades 4and 8 teachers indicated their school has a review process for evaluating such materials.

Teaching Practices

Teachers at each grade level reported using a variety of teaching strategies. The use of mini-lessons to the whole class was reported to be a much more common occurrence at all levels thanthe use of whole-class lectures. Frequent use of activities such as reading aloud to the class,large-group discussion, and small-group work for discussion, sharing or assignment completionwas reported by a large majority of teachers. Contrary to the curriculum guidelines, however,teachers appear to place greater emphasis on teacher-directed experiences than on student-centered experiences. A significant percentage of teachers reported making infrequent or no useof student-centered activities such as reader response logs/journals, reading conferences, andreaders theatre.

Teachers professed to value the use of a range of teaching practices, although to varyingdegrees. Variety of reading material and opportunities for personal response were judged veryimportant by the highest percentage of teachers at each grade. Under two-thirds of grades 8 and11 teachers and a little over two-thirds of grade 4 teachers ascribed great importance to studentunderstanding and use of specific strategies for reading different types of materials.

Evaluation

Teachers claimed to value the use of a variety of evaluation products and processes for assessingreading growth and development. Daily work assignments, projects/presentations andreading/writing portfolios were credited with great importance by the highest percentage ofteachers at each grade level and standardized tests by the lowest percentage. In the category

xvii

I7


of evaluation processes, attitudes to reading emerged as the most important means of evaluationand peer evaluation as the least important. A substantial majority of teachers at each grade leveldid not identify strategy evaluation as a very important means of assessing reading, and asignificant percentage gave only a somewhat important rating to such means of evaluation asreading/writing portfolios, reading response journals or logs, observation, and self-evaluation.Survey respondents at each grade level reported spending more time on formative evaluationthan on summative evaluation.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are common to all three grades. Other specific grade levelrecommendations are found at the end of each grade level report.

Since the role of administrators as curriculum leaders is crucial to program implementation, theirsupport is required for the successful implementation of many of the following recommendationswhich state that:

curriculum documents be reviewed by Manitoba Education and Training with a view toaddressing teachers' concerns at various grades related to readability, accessibility,philosophy and implementation approaches;

educators have access to and make regular use of curriculum documents in planning,delivering and assessing daily instruction;

students be given access to a wide variety of appropriate reading materials;

teachers become proficient at structuring various interactive learning experiences in orderto develop students' higher-order thinking skills;

teachers become proficient at structuring learning experiences which require students torecognize, articulate and use appropriate strategies for processing different types of text(e.g., exposition, poetry, narration, and tabular and statistical information);

curriculum leaders provide opportunities for teachers to acquire and use a variety ofevaluation strategies and resources consistent with the goals and objectives of the curriculum;

educators (teachers, administrators and curriculum leaders) be informed and brought up todate, through professional development opportunities, on current research in

reading/language arts.


CHAPTER 1

MANITOBA READING ASSESSMENT 1992: OVERVIEW

In 1992, the Assessment Section of the Curriculum Services Branch of Manitoba Education andTraining carried out an assessment of the reading dimension of the English Language Artscurriculum for grades 4, 8 and 11. Tests and surveys were administered to three client groups:English language schools, Franco-Manitoban schools and the French Immersion program. Anoverview of the development, implementation and processing of the various components of the1992 Manitoba Reading Assessment is provided below.

Population Tested

Public and Funded Independent Schools in Manitoba were requested in January, 1992, to submitclass lists of all students currently enrolled in grades 4 and 8, as well as all grade 11 studentsenrolled in second term or full-year English Language Arts courses.

Manitoba Education and Training selected students for the provincial sample from the class listssubmitted by participating schools. Students in English language schools, Franco-Manitobanschools and the French Immersion program were sampled separately for the purposes ofanalysis. Provincial samples were drawn from the three client groups as follows:

English language schools 5% at grades 4, 8 and 11;Franco-Manitoban schools 100% at grades 4, 8 and 11; andFrench Immersion programs 25%, 30% and 100% at grades 4 , 8 and 11 respectively.

Table 1 below indicates the number of tests returned, scored, coded and analyzed. (See detailedtables in Appendices AC.)

TABLE 1

READING ASSESSMENT (1992): PROVINCIAL SAMPLE

GradeEnglish Language

SchoolsFranco-Manitoban

SchoolsFrench Immersion

Program

48

11

568540739

430437160

456413415


2

While schools and divisions were required to test only the sampled students, they had the optionof testing all students at the designated grades and comparing school and divisional results withthe provincial results.

The provincial sample of teachers surveyed in the respective client groups is represented inTable 2 below. (See detailed tables in Appendix D.)

TABLE 2

TEACHER SURVEY (1992): PROVINCIAL SAMPLE*

GradeEnglish Language

SchoolsFranco-Manitoban

SchoolsFrench Immersion

Program

48

11

248252201

17

16

12

692934

* Number of surveys returned

A copy of a Reading Continuum Rating was sent to grade 4 English Language Arts teacherswhose students had been selected to participate in the 1992 Reading Assessment.

Samples for the comparison testing of the 1985 Reading Assessment in grades 3, 6, 9 and 12,which took place May 11 to 15, 1992, were drawn from all schools in Manitoba withoutdistinction between client groups. Approximately 10% of the schools in the province wereselected to participate at each of the four grade levels.

Purpose of Assessment

Curriculum assessment in Manitoba is designed to measure the goals and objectives of theManitoba curriculum with the intent of identifying strengths and weakness and determining thedegree of implementation of the various curricula. Province-wide assessments are intended tomeasure program effectiveness through the measurement of group performance; they are notintended to test the achievement of individual students.

The 1992 Reading Assessment in grades 4, 8 and 11 was part of the ongoing process ofcurriculum assessment in Manitoba. Several comparison tests were conducted as part of theassessment. The 1985 Reading Assessment was re-administered to a small sample of grades 3,6, 9 and 12 students to determine the degree of change in student results over time. In grade 4,a survey was conducted on teacher use of reading continua to determine the level ofimplementation of such instruments and to examine the relationship, if any, of teacher ratingsof students (using the continuum provided) and student test results. A comparison was also made

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program9 0

3

in Franco-Manitoban schools at the grades 4 and 8 level to ascertain possible differences in thetest results of students enrolled in partial and total francais programs. (Results reported inFranco-Manitoban report only.)

Rationale for Test Construction

In the Manitoba English Language Arts curriculum, reading is viewed as an interactivecommunication process between author, reader and text. The process of exploring and derivingmeaning from text requires readers to draw on their knowledge of content, text structure, syntaxand grapho-phonics, and activate their repertoire of reading strategies before, during and afterreading. Thinking must also occur if readers are to integrate their prior knowledge with newinformation and interpret and evaluate the author's message. Thus, readers are influenced by acombination of interactive factors such as the type of text being read, the structure and contentof the reading materials, and the purpose for reading, as well as the strategies, knowledge,experience and attitudes brought to bear on the text and reading task.

This approach to reading provided the rationale for the content and structure of the 1992 ReadingAssessment, informing the identification of objectives, the selection of reading materials, andthe choice of question types, response formats and scoring rubrics. The provincial ReadingAssessment was designed to modelto the greatest extent possible given the constraints offormalized, large-scale assessmenthow the teaching, learning and assessing of reading canoccur in the regular classroom.

Development and Administration of Assessment Instruments

Technical Advisory Committees (TAC) composed of education consultants, contract writers andsubject area teachers from different parts of the province representing the three client groupswere established for each of the three grades. These committees were responsible for reviewingand identifying the instructional objectives to he assessed, selecting assessment reading materials,and determining the format and content of ne tests, surveys and scoring rubrics. Following theinitial construction of the assessment items, the tests were piloted in representative Manitobaschools in January, 1992, and subsequently revised on the basis of the pilot test results.

The provincial administration of the Reading Assessment occurred May 25 to 29, 1992, inEnglish language schools, Franco-Manitoban schools and the French Immersion program. Testswere administered to students in grades 4, 8 and 11. Whereas the grade 11 test was to becompleted in one session of 120 minutes, the grade 8 test was to be conducted in two sessions,each within a suggested time frame of up to 80 minutes. In consideration of the developmentalstage of Early Years children, it was recommended that the grade 4 assessment be administeredeither in four half-hour sessions or two one-hour sessions, and that the sessions occur on thesame day or on consecutive days. The accompanying Administration Manual emphasized theimportance of giving students ample time and encouragement to do their best work so that thepurpose of the assessment could be achieved.

4.,Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

4

The student tests were scored and coded July 6 to 10, 1992, by trained teams. (For informationon scoring procedures and protocol, see Appendix E. Detailed coding procedures are availablefrom the Assessment Section of Manitoba Education and Training.) Provincial test data werereleased in November, 1992, in a Preliminary Report for each grade and client groupparticipating in the assessment. Preparation of the Final Report of the Reading Assessmentresults began in August, 1992.

Objectives Assessed

The Reading Assessment for each of the three grades attempted to measure reading objectivesin the following areas:

MEANING VOCABULARYUnderstanding words in context.

LITERAL COMPREHENSIONUnderstanding explicitly stated meaning.

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONInferring meaning not actually stated.

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSIONConsidering and evaluating the implications of text.

READING STRATEGIES AND PROCESS SKILLSRecognizing the use of, and interaction between, the thinking and metacognitive strategiesinvolved in the reading process.Adapting and varying the use of these strategies at a conscious level according to the demandsof the text and/or reading situation.

These objectives, which were assessed in relation to a variety of textual materials, formed thebasis for the organization of the Reading Assessment results into five subtests.

Selection of Reading Materials

At all grade levels, the assessment reading materials were selected with the intent of integratingand reinforcing the curriculum approach to reading as an interactive communication processbetween author, reader and text. Numerous considerations were taken into account in thematerial selection process, including curriculum expectations, age appropriateness, gender andmulticultural inclusiveness, topical relevance and reading situation.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 22

5

Exposing students to an increasing variety of texts is a central emphasis of the English LanguageArts curriculum at Early, Middle and Senior Years. Accordingly, attention was given toincluding various types of text in the Reading Assessment. While it was impossible to samplethe full range of reading materials and reading tasks with which students are engaged in dailylife, an attempt was made to include a variety of texts representative of the kinds of readingmaterials students encounter throughout the school year, both in and out of the classroom. Thegrades 4, 8 and 11 Reading Assessments each included the following three types of text:narration, poetry and exposition. In addition, the grade 8 test included a table, and the grade 11test included a table and charts. In the interest of preserving the structural and topical integrityof text, all the reading selections used in the assessment were complete texts, with the exceptionof the grade 8 expository material, which consisted of excerpts from various kinds of expositorytexts, reflecting the process frequently used in reading this type of material.

Topical relevance and accessibility were primary considerations in the selection and presentationof the assessment reading materials. As students were expected to read and respond to thematerials independently (that is, without prior discussion), great emphasis was placed onchoosing materials of appropriate difficulty. Care was also taken to include texts reflecting andrelating to the interests and experiences of students at the different grade levels. Ensuring abalanced representation of male and female authors and/or characters was part of this effort. Thereading materials for each grade were chosen on the basis of a theme thought to have specialinterest for students at a given grade, and were presented in a format judged to be suitable forthe intended audience. Each of the reading selections was preceded by brief comments intendedto help focus students' thoughts on stylistic and/or thematic aspects of the text and to activatethe readers' prior knowledge/experience of a given topic before reading.

Nature in Manitoba formed the unifying theme of the grade 4 reading selections consisting oftwo short stories, a poem and three expository pieces. These texts, each focusing on humanencounters with animals in a natural environment in Manitoba, were reproduced directly in theStudent Booklet for ease of student reference. The grade 8 reading materials, comprising a shortstory, a poem, a table and five related excerpts from expository texts, addressed the theme ofrisk-taking. The grade 11 materials, each dealing with an aspect of human interaction, consistedof an expository article, a table and two charts, a short story, and two poems, one of which waswritten by a teenage poet. The thematically linked reading selections for the grade 8 assessmentwere reproduced in Risk-Taking Review, and those for the grade II assessment were featuredin Journal of Human Interaction, two sample journal issues produced specifically for theassessment, partly in recognition of the sophisticated visual design of most current literaturedirected at young people.

Both the content and format of these special journal issues were intended to reflect the kind ofliterature and reading demands that students are likely to encounter in the school curricula andelsewhere in society. The choice of a journal format was an attempt to make the assessmentreading materials appealing and accessible to students and relate it to their experience. It wasalso a means of allowing the text to be retained in classrooms for future use.


'G.

6

Question Types and Response Formats

In order to obtain information on specific reading objectives at the three grade levels, eachassessment included testing in five areas: Meaning Vocabulary; Literal Comprehension;Interpretive Comprehension; Critical-Reflective Comprehension; and Reading Strategies andProcess Skills. Questions assessing the specified objectives were not grouped for the most part,but were interspersed throughout the assessment and applied to a range of materials. Thisapproach was taken to reinforce the concept that reading involves various interactive,complementary skills rather than discrete and decontextualized skills.

Both choice (select-type) and open-ended (supply-type) test items were included at each of thegrade levels. On the grade 4 test both types of items were numbered consecutively, whereas onthe grades 8 and 11 tests the choice items were numbered and the open-ended items weredesignated by letter. The majority of items were presented in the choice format, with instructionsto choose the best, correct or applicable response(s) from the options available.

Open-ended items were included to move away from a mechanistic way of assessing readingtowards a more authentic approach which allows assessment of a range of objectives in a limitedamount of time and provides students with an opportunity to give a multiplicity of text-appropriate responses demonstrating higher level comprehension. Students were expected to givea variety of open-ended responses, including opinions, explanations or reasons for a givenanswer, and textual support or proof for a statement. While most of the items related to a singlereading selection, a few at the grade 11 level required students to consider several selections andtheir relationship to each other in order to evaluate the application of learning from one readingcontext to another.

All but one of the open-ended items required written responses. The one exception, occurringon the grade 4 test, asked for a pictorial response (drawing) as an alternative mode ofcommunicating reading comprehension. This item was included to emphasize that various modesof expressing comprehension are valid and can be used for teaching, learning and assessing.

A set of focusing and/or prior knowledge questions preceded the scored segment of the ReadingAssessment at each of the three grade levels. On the grade 4 test, the reading selections werealso preceded by focusing questions. These questions were intended to introduce students to thetheme of the assessment, activate their prior knowledge of a subject to provide a personalcontext framework for the reading selections and prepare them for the independent reading tasksto follow. They were not intended to measure student reading performance.

24


Scoring Procedures

JP"

7

Detailed information on the scoring of both the choice and open-ended response items wasprovided in the Scoring Key prepared in conjunction with the Reading Assessment. The scoringkey specified the correct response for all choice items included on the grades 8 and 11 tests, andfor nearly all of the choice items on the grade 4 test. Since there was considerable room forsubjectivity in responding to the items on the grade 4 Reading Strategies and Process Skillssubtest, most of the response options for these items could not be classified as right or wrong.However, the preferred responses for these items were identified as expected responses in theScoring Key and in the Preliminary Report.

The Scoring Key provided the following four-point rubric for scoring the open-ended responseitems: Complete (C), Partial (P), Wrong (W), and No Response (NR). A general description ofthe anticipated response and, where applicable, examples of student responses obtained duringthe piloting of the Reading Assessment were also included. The scoring rubric was developedon the basis of readers' interaction with the text to make meaning. In general, completeresponses were characterized by: specific and accurate textual references; absence of extraneousinformation; consistent interpretation; appropriate and solid support; communication of completeunderstanding; evidence of reader interaction with an author's intent; and rational, logical andwell-developed responses. Partial responses demonstrated some understanding, but providedinsufficient information, generalized textual references and/or inconsistent interpretations.Although partial responses were in essence correct, they were not sufficiently supported to befully satisfactory. For the purpose of calculating the mean performance on the subtests, completeresponses were given a value of 1.0 and partial responses were given a value of 0.5.

One item (item 31) on the grade 4 Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest was removed fromanalysis because on scoring it proved to be an invalid question. The scoring key was alsomodified slightly for one item (item 23) on the same subtest. These changes have beenincorporated in the relevant documents available from the Manitoba Text Book Bureau.

Assessment Components (1992)

The grades 4, 8 and 11 tests were presented in the Student Booklets distributed to all assessmentparticipants. These booklets contained the focusing and prior knowledge questions, the itemsassessing the instructional objectives for each of the five subtests, and the reading survey itemsinquiring about students' reading interests and habits both in and out of the English LanguageArts classroom. Whereas the reading materials selected for the grade 4 assessment werereproduced directly in the Student Booklet, those for the grade 8 and giude 11 assessment werefeatured respectively in Risk-Taking Review and Journal of Human Interaction, two samplejournal issues produced specifically for the 1992 Reading Assessment.

c J Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

8

Schools participating in the Reading Assessment were also provided with a package of extensionactivities to encourage the integration of the assessment materials and activities with classroomlearning experiences. These extension activities, combined with the Risk-Taking Review andJournal of Human Interaction, were intended to provide a cohesive thematic unit for authenticassessment and future use.

The 1992 Reading Assessment had several components in addition to the student test and readingsurvey. A Reading Continuum Rating was sent to grade 4 English Language Arts teachers whosestudents had been selected to participate in the assessment. Its purpose was to obtain teacherratings on the reading levels of grade 4 students and the extent to which English Language Artsteachers use reading continua in Manitoba schools, and to assess the relationship between teacherratings of students and the assessment results.

A Teacher Questionnaire was also sent to a sample of grades 4, 8 and 11 teachers teachingEnglish Language Arts in English language schools, Franco-Manitoban schools and the FrenchImmersion program. This component of the Reading Assessment was intended to give teachersan opportunity to provide information and express their opinions and perspectives on theimportance and implementation of various aspects of reading in the English Language Artscurriculum at the three designated grade levels. The teacher survey results were processedsimultaneously with the student test and survey results, and are reviewed and discussed in thisreport.

Assessment Results

The results for each component of the 1992 Reading Assessment are reported and discussed inthe following chapters of the Final Report. Assessment results for grades 4, 8 and 11 arereported in separate sections. Each section contains: a chapter providing a detailed descriptionof the results for each item on the five subtests and an interpretation of student performance oneach subtest, as well as a report of the student survey findings; a chapter reporting the teachersurvey results; and a chapter discussing the student and teacher findings resulting in conclusionsand recommendations. The last chapter of this report contains the results of: the grade 4 readingcontinuum rating for all client groups combined; and the comparison testing (1985-1992) for allrelevant grades and client groups.


GRADE 4

9

FRENCH IMMERSIONPROGRAM

< .

r; -7(Reading Final Report, French Immersion Schools

9

CHAPTER 2

S

STUDENT TEST AND READING SURVEY RESULTS (GRADE 4)

INTRODUCTION

The grade 4 Reading Assessment sought to determine the extent to which the reading objectivesof the English Language Arts curriculum are being implemented by testing student performancein the following five areas:

Meaning VocabularyLiteral ComprehensionInterpretive ComprehensionCritical-Reflective ComprehensionReading Strategies and Process Skills

These objectives formed the basis for the categorization of the test items into five cognitivesubtests.

The specified reading objectives were assessed in relation to the following three types of text:

Narration: Lyndsay Barrett George, "William and Boomer" (short story)Jane Chelsea Aragon, "Salt Hands" (short story, accompanied by illustration)

Poetry: Robert Heidbreder, "Polar Bear Snow"Exposition: map, information, letter (relating to the Fort Whyte Centre, Winnipeg)

These thematically linked and gender balanced reading selections, each focusing on humanencounters with animals in a natural environment in Manitoba, were preceded by brief commentsintended to help focus students' thoughts on the various stylistic and thematic elements of thetexts. All the reading selections were complete texts and were reproduced directly in the StudentBooklet for ease of student reference.

The final component of the student test consisted of a reading survey inquiring about students'attitudes towards reading, as well as their reading habits and activities in and out of the EnglishLanguage Arts classroom.

In the Student Booklet the test items were grouped according to the specific text to which theywere directed rather than the objectives being assessed. However, the test results reported beloware presented by subtest, followed by reading survey data. The numbers presented may notalways total 100% because of rounding-off. A frequency distribution of responses to eachassessment item was provided in the Preliminary Report.

23


10

FOCUSING AND PRIOR KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS

ITEMS: 1-5

The grade 4 Reading Assessment emphasized the importance of pre-reading activities by posingfocusing and/or prior knowledge questions at the start of each section of the assessment. Thesequestions were intended to encourage students to draw on their store of knowledge, bring theirown experience to the print, anticipate possibilities within the reading selections, and stimulatetheir thinking about the topics (content) explored in the various texts.

The response rate for each of the five focusing/prior knowledge questions introducing theassessment was 100%. This indicates that the goal of these questions was achieved by allassessment participants.

MEANING VOCABULARY

ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 14, 15, 16, 18, 33, 59

OBJECTIVE: Meaning Vocabulary

Understanding words in context.

Explicit contextual use: the meaning is stated in the text.Implicit contextual use: the meaning is suggested by the text.

The Meaning Vocabulary subtest, consisting of six multiple-choice items, assessed students'ability to determine the meaning of selected words within a specific reading context. Of the sixwords being assessed, three were used in expository writing, one in the poem, and two in thenarrative selections. In each case, students were referred to a particular reading selection and/orpage in the Student Booklet where the respective words were used. An icon (gar) was placed inthe margins of the text to help students locate the specific context.

RESULTS

The mean performance on the Meaning Vocabulary subtest was 79.13% (see Table 3 below).As shown in Table 4, the percentage of correct responses for the six multiple-choice itemscomprising the subtest ranged from 57.2% to 92.3%.


I

11

TABLE 3

MEANING VOCABULARY SUBTEST MEANSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Subtest Total MarksPer Subtest

MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

MEANING VOCABULARY 6 4.75 79.13% 1.25

The Meaning Vocabulary items generating the highest percentage of correct responses offeredmultiple contextual clues to the meaning of the words in question. For example, the poem inwhich a polar bear is described as a "monstrous snowball" contains numerous adjectives (forexample, "gigantic," "huge") whose meaning, within the context, is synonymous with"monstrous." The poet further describes the bear's actions and physical attributes with the useof verbs such as "grew" and "towered" and the use of large numbers emphasizing the immensesize of the bear. Given the profusion of explicit clues offered in the text, it is not surprising thatclose to nine-tenths of the students correctly selected "very large" as the meaning of the word"monstrous" (item 18). A little over nine-tenths accurately selected "a soft crackling sound"as the definition of the word "rustle" used in the story "Salt Hands" (item 59). In this text, thenarrator uses the word "rustle" to describe something she "heard" and pairs it with the word"breath," thereby suggesting a soft or quiet sound.

TABLE 4

MEANING VOCABULARYMULTIPLE- CHOICE ITEMS

French Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Item Type ofText

Word MeaningPercentageof Student

Responses Correct

14 Exposition endangered Experiential 57.2%15 Exposition consent Implicit 69.316 Exposition purchase Explicit 88.818 Poetry monstrous Explicit 88.233 Narration reeds Implicit 78.959 Narration rustle Explicit 92.3

30


12

No explicit contextual clues were available for the item concerning the short story, "Williamand Boomer" (item 33). Despite this, nearly four-fifths of the students selected the correctdefinition of the word "reeds," as it is used in the story. To arrive at the correct definition,students were required to draw on prior knowledge regarding the term "reeds" and/or a goose'snatural habitat, or infer meaning by synthesizing various aspects of the story's physical setting("lake," "fishing") and associating these details with the term "reeds."

Somewhat uneven results are apparent for the three items relating to the letter from a grade 4class asking for parental consent to participation in a field trip. The results are, however,consistent with the level of contextual complexity: almost nine-tenths of the students chose thecorrect definition of the word "purchase," whose meaning is explicitly suggested by the use ofsynonyms ("buy," "bought") and monetary references (item 16); over two-thirds accuratelyselected the definition of the word "consent," whose meaning could be inferred through phrasessuch as "If you wish," "I would like" (item 15); and close to three-fifths recognized themeaning of the word "endangered," a lengthy word conveying an abstract concept which is notsupported by any contextual clues (item 14).

Interpretation

Students gave a strong performance on the Meaning Vocabulary subtest. Approximatelynine-tenths of the students were able to understand the words for which explicit contextual clueswere available. A considerably smaller proportion demonstrated the ability to infer vocabularymeaning from implicit contextual clues or from prior knowledge or experience. Wordsconveying abstract concepts posed greater difficulty for students than those conveying concreteconcepts.

LITERAL COMPREHENSION

ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 19, 61, 62Open-ended: 23, 35, 36, 56

OBJECTIVE: Literal Comprehension

Understanding explicitly stated meaning.

This subtest assessed the readers' ability to understand the literal meaning of explicitly statedtextual information. Students were expected to attend closely to the reading materials as well asto the wording of the questions/statements.


13

Of the twelve items comprising the Literal Comprehension subtest, two related to the poetry,and five each to the narrative and expository texts. Eight items were presented in themultiple-choice format and four in the open-ended format. Open-ended responses were matchedagainst the responses outlined in the Scoring Key.

RESULTS

As shown in Table 5 below, the mean performance on the Literal Comprehension subtest was76.14%. This percentage takes into account the results for the eight multiple-choice items (seeTable 6), as well as the results for the four open-ended items (see Table 7).

TABLE 5

LITERAL COMPREHENSION SUBTEST MEANSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)

SubtestTotal MarksPer Subtest

MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

LITERAL COMPREHENSIONMultiple-ChoiceOpen-Ended (Rubric)

TOTAL

8

4

12

6.212.93

9.14

77.58%73.27

76.14

1.400.78

1.82

Multiple-Choice Items

The percentage of correct responses for the eight multiple-choice items on the LiteralComprehension subtest ranged from 43.9% to 99.1% (see Table 6 below). On average, morethan three-quarters of the responses to these items were correct, suggesting that the vast majorityof students had little difficulty understanding explicitly stated meaning in the various types oftext.

The item for which virtually all assessment participants selected the correct response requiredstudents to identify the seasonal setting of the poem, "Polar Bear Snow" (item 19). In additionto making an explicit reference to winter in the opening stanza, the poet includes numerousseasonal references ("snow," "snowballs," "frozen ground") which most Manitoba studentswould naturally, although perhaps not exclusively, associate with a winter landscape.

J 4)Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

14

TABLE 6

LITERAL COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS


Item Type of TextPercentage of Student

Responses Correct

6 Exposition 59.0%7 Exposition 43.99 Exposition 83.8

12 Exposition 91.713 Exposition 90.819 Poetry 99.161 Narration 78.962 Narration 73.5

Approximately three-quarters of the students chose the appropriate responses to both themultiple-choice items relating to "Salt Hands," a story about a girl's encounter with a deer. Forone of the items, students were required to pay close attention to the wording of the fourresponse options referring to the ears, tail, antlers and colour of the deer, and match theseagainst the narrative description of the deer's physical attributes (item 62). The othernarrative-related item required students to note explicit descriptions of the girl's singing ("I sang. . . softly," "I whispered my song") and make the connection that, within the context of thestory, the adverb "quietly" is equivalent in meaning to the words "softly" and "whispered"(item 61-78.9% selected the correct adverb "quietly"; 18.0% chose the term "slowly" whichdescribes the girl's actions in general).

The percentage of correct responses to the five multiple-choice items dealing with variousexpository texts ranged from 43.9% to 91.7%. Both the items concerning the letter in which agrade 4 class requests parental permission to participate in a field trip resulted in a high rate ofcorrect responses. Approximately nine-tenths of the students correctly identified the purpose ofthe field trip (item 13) as well as one of the destinations of the field trip (item 12). In bothcases, the information is directly stated in the letter.

Two items applied to information on the hours and rates of admission to the Fort Whyte Centre.More than four-fifths of the students successfully determined their own price of admission to theCentre on the basis of the student admission fees specified in the "General Admission"information panel (item 9). Less than half the students selected the correct day and date onwhich a visit could be made to the Fort Whyte Centre after 5:00 p.m. (item 7). The correctday/date could be identified by matching the various response options against the informationon "Extended Summer Hours," isolating the applicable option and/or eliminating theinapplicable options. A synthesis of information was required. Clearly, this was a complex literalcomprehension task ranking high on the continuum of difficulty.


33

15

For the remaining item, students were expected to locate a particular point on a map anddetermine direction of travel to a specified destination on the basis of the compass symbolincluded on the map (item 6). Just under three-fifths of the students accomplished this difficulttask involving skills such as reading charts and graphing.

Open-Ended Items

On average, nearly two-thirds (65.8%) of the responses to the four open-ended items on theLiteral Comprehension subtest were scored as complete responses, nearly a quarter (23.1%)were rated as partial responses, and about a tenth (9.7%) were judged to be wrong responses(see Table 7 below). The response rate for these four items was 96.7% or higher.

TABLE 7

LITERAL COMPREHENSIONOPEN -ENDED ITEMS


Percentageof Student Responses

Item Type of Text Complete Partial Wrong NR

23 Poetry 34.6% 51.1% 14.0% 0.2%35 Narration 96.3 1.1 2.2 0.436 Narration 87.7 7.2 3.3 1.856 Narration 44.7 32.9 19.1 3.3

The two open-ended items focusing on "William and Boomer," a story about how a boy anda goose spend a summer by the lake, resulted in an exceptionally high percentage of completeresponses. Virtually all students provided fully satisfactory explanations of why William's initialrequest to learn to swim was refused by his parents, both of whom gave the same explicitlystated reason for their refusal (item 35). Close to nine-tenths also fulfilled the expectation of thesecond item, which was to list two things William learned to do as spring turned to summer(item 36). Since the story lists more than half a dozen activities, it is not surprising that the vastmajority of students were able to identify two.

Z4 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

16

More than three-quarters of the students gave either a complete or partial response to the itemasking them to account for their knowledge that the narrator of "Salt Hands" is a girl (item 56).

Since nothing in the story itself indicates that the narrator is a girl, students were expected to

use clues external to the narrative in formulating their responses. Student responses wereconsidered legitimate if they made reference to the directions preceding the story or to thepicture illustrating the story (both of which inform the reader that the narrator is a girl), and/orindicated that the story has a female author and is written in the first person (this explanation

was considered an acceptable response, given the cognitive development of students at this

level). The high percentage of complete and partial responses to this item suggests that moststudents have some awareness of the importance of using supplementary (e.g., visual) clues tounderstand the text, and are using them in their reading.

The poetry-related open-ended item asked students to draw a descriptive picture of an important

section of the poem, "Polar Bear Snow," with instructions to incorporate as many details as

possible (item 23). The purpose of including this item was to provide students with an

opportunity to use an alternative mode of communicating comprehension. This item not only

emphasized the importance of reading for details in the directions as well as in the poem, but

it also emphasized the need to identify important elements in the poem for use in the drawing.

Over four-fifths of the students drew pictures which were considered complete or partial

responses.

In scoring the drawings, credit was given to the inclusion of basic information supplied in the

poem, along with a range of additional details included in the poem. A complete response

featured eight to ten details, a partial response five to seven, and a wrong response four orfewer. The depiction of an unusual point of view was also given credit (the equivalent of five

details) in combination with basic and/or additional information. This option accommodated

certain points of view which did not allow for multiple details, or which included details

extending beyond the immediate text (thus allowing for an interpretive response even though a

literal response was expected).

Interpretation

The Literal Comprehension subtest results indicate that a substantial majority of students have

well-developed skills in understanding the literal or explicitly stated meaning of various types

of text, although some areas of inexperience and/or weakness are also evident in students'responses. The two multiple-choice items (items 6 and 7) resulting in the lowest percentage of

correct responses both dealt with expository text. These items involved highly complex

processing skills such as map reading and graphing (item 6) and synthesizing information from

a detailed schedule (item 7), thus ranking high on the continuum of difficulty in literal

comprehension.


17

Although the mean performance was slightly higher on the multiple-choice items than on theopen-ended items, students also demonstrated strong literal comprehension skills in theiropen-ended responses, particularly those relating to the narrative reading selections. Nearly allstudents provided complete responses to the items addressing the story, "William and Boomer."In contrast, only a little over a third of the students were credited with complete success in theirpictorial responses to the poetry-related item (the only open-ended test item requiring a modeof response other than writing); however, a small majority achieved partial success.

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSION

ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 10, 20, 57, 58Open-ended: 60

OBJECTIVE: Interpretive Comprehension

Inferring meaning not actually stated.

The Interpretive Comprehension subtest challenged students to go beyond a literal reading of thevarious texts by observing and interpreting subtle or inexplicit textual details. In some cases,students were required to synthesize various details within the respective texts to draw relevantinferences or appropriate conclusions.

Of the five items comprising the Interpretive Comprehension subtest, three related to thenarrative, one to the poem, and one to the expository text. Whereas four of the items requireda multiple-choice response, one required an open-ended response. Student responses to theopen-ended item were matched against the responses outlined in the Scoring Key.

RESULTS

As reflected in Table 8 below, the mean performance on the five-item InterpretiveComprehension subtest was 74.85%. About two-thirds of the students provided complete orpartial responses to the open-ended item, and over two-thirds provided correct responses to eachof the four multiple-choice items (see Table 9).

3ltiading Final Report, French Immersion Program

18

TABLE 8

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSION SUBTEST MEANSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)


MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSION 5 3.74 74.85% 0.99

TABLE 9

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE AND OPEN-ENDED ITEMS


MULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS

Item Type of TextPercentage of Student Responses

Correct

10205758

ExpositionPoetryNarrationNarration

89.7%69.776.394.1

OPEN-ENDED ITEM

Percentage of Student Responses


60 Narration 21.3% 46.3% 22.6% 9.9%

Of the five items comprising the Interpretive Comprehension subtest, four dealt with literarytext. The three items concerning the story, "Salt Hands," focused on the girl telling the story.When asked to select the word describing how the girl feels at the beginning of the story, overthree-quarters of the students chose the correct adjective, "curious," an attribute conveyedthrough the girl's sensory awareness of her surroundings (e.g., through hearing, sight, touch)and her responses to her observations (item 57). Nearly all students noted correctly that the girl'spurpose in sprinkling salt into her hands is to encourage the deer to come closer, presumablybasing their responses on the girl's statement that she put salt in her hands because she "didn'twant to frighten the deer" and/or on the deer's response of coming close to the girl and sniffing,tasting and licking the salt (item 58). For the third item, students were expected to use an


S19

example from the story to describe how the author conveys the girl's patience (item 60). Justover two-thirds of the students provided textual examples reflecting either a full or partialunderstanding of the word "patient."

With respect to the item concerning "Polar Bear Snow," a poem about a person's encounterwith a polar bear that initially appears to be a monstrous snowball, students were expected toobserve the action within the poem. Specifically, students were required to infer that the bearis sleeping when the person in the poem first sees it, based on to the person's actions (e.g.,pushing, punching, and kicking the bear) and the bear's response (e.g., moving, stretching,growing). More than two-thirds of the students made the correct inference that the bear is"sleeping"; almost a quarter (24.3%) noted incorrectly that the bear is "growling" (item 20).

One of the Interpretive Comprehension items dealt with expository text. In selecting the correctresponse to this question (item 10), students were required to locate the specific section of thetext providing information on admission to the Fort Whyte Centre, and infer that, in this context,"free" means not having to pay admission, and that babies would be included in the "under 3years of age" group for whom admission is free. Approximately nine-tenths of the responsesto this item were correct.

Interpretation

The results for the Interpretive Comprehension subtest indicate that a substantial majority ofstudents have developed the ability to infer meaning from subtle or implicit textual details.Moreover, they are able to apply their interpretive comprehension skills to various types of text.

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSION

ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 63Open-ended: 21, 22, 31' 32, 37, 67

OBJECTIVE: Critical-Reflective Comprehension

Considering and evaluating the implications of text.

Students' critical-reflective comprehension skills were assessed in relation to poetry and narrativetext, with two items focusing on the former and four on the latter. The various items on thissubtest required students to consider stylistic elements of text, order the sequence of narrated

'Observations of the marking team and the grade 4 Technical AdvisoryCommittee led to the conclusion thatitem 31 was an invalid question. Consequently, item 31 was eliminated from analysis.

Reading Rnal Report, French Immersion Program

38

20

events, evaluate text on the basis of its realistic and make-belief elements, interpret the viewsexpressed in the writing, explore the implications of text, and elaborate on the meaning of text.With the exception of one multiple-choice item, all the items on this subtest required open-endedresponses. These were matched against the responses outlined in the Scoring Key.

RESULTS

The Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest, consisting of six items, resulted in a meanperformance of 60.33% (see Table 10 below), which is considerably lower than the meanperformance on the previous three subtests.

TABLE 10

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSION SUBTEST MEANSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)


MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSION 6 I 3.62 60.33%

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

1.21

An overview of the results for this subtest shows that nearly all the responses to themultiple-choice item were correct, and that almost three-quarters of responses to the fiveopen-ended items were scored either as complete (36.1%) or partial (35.2%) responses, whilejust over a quarter (26.0%) were scored wrong. The response rate for each of the items was93.4% or higher (see Table 11 below).


21

TABLE 11

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE AND OPEN-ENDED ITEMS


MULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEM

Item Type of Text Percentage of Student ResponsesCorrect

63 Narration 93.4%

OPEN-ENDED ITEMS



21 Poetry 25.9% 31.1% 36.4% 6.6%22 Poetry 52.9 18.9 27.9 0.432 Narration 27.9 39.5 32.2 0.437 Narration 61.0 21.5 16.7 0.967 Narration 12.9 65.1 16.9 5.0

Both the poetry-related items and one of the narrative-related items required students toformulate opinions based on their ability to discriminate between realistic and unrealisticelements within the given texts, a process relying heavily on prior understanding of the concept.One of these items asked students to consider a section of the poem in which the poet providesa description of the polar bear using increasingly large numbers, some of which exceed theplausible, and give a textually based opinion regarding the poet's purpose in using numbers(item 21). Close to three-fifths of the students demonstrated either a complete or partialunderstanding of the poet's exaggerated use of numbers to emphasize the size and danger of thebear, which reflects an appreciation of the metaphoric use of language.

The other two related items involved similar tasks. One item instructed students to give atextually supported reason for judging the story related in the poem to be true or not true(item 22). Since the poem includes both real and imaginary components, students had the optionof arguing that the story could not be true, or that some parts could he true and others not true.A small majority of students provided fully satisfactory support for the argument of their choice,and just under a fifth gave partially satisfactory support. Slightly over two-thirds of the studentsgave complete or partial responses to the item asking them to state their opinion as to whetherthe story "William and Boomer" is "a make-believe story" or "a real-life story," withinstructions to list two pieces of information from the story giving clear support for eitherposition (item 32). These results suggest that the majority of students have the ability todistinguish between realistic and unrealistic elements of literary text.


22

While the two items concerning the story "Salt Hands" required different types of responses(one multiple-choice and one open-ended), they had a similar focus in that each item expectedstudents to attend closely to the views expressed in the text. Almost all students indicatedcorrectly that the author's feeling about deer is .Jne of interest, which is communicated throughhe 7 character's sensitive and detailed observation and description of the deer's appearance,movements, actions and even feelings (item 63). The task in the open-ended item was to describethe character of the girl in "Salt Hands," using details from the story (item 67). Essentially, thisinvolved an assessment of the author's feeling about her character, as conveyed through herdescription of the girl's actions and observations. While little more than a tenth of the studentsgave complete responses, close to two-thirds provided partial responses. (Some students mayhave been confused about the term "character," interpreting the question as a request to givea physical description of the character.)

One item on this subtest dealt with "William and Boomer," a story about a boy's discovery ofand activities with a goose, narrated in chronological order. Students were given a list of sixevents from the story and instructed to sequence them in the order in which they occur in thenarrative (item 37). This involved rewriting them on the adjacent page containing a story mapof three boxes labelled "beginning," "middle," and "end" of "William and Boomer." Overthree-fifths of students placed all six events in the appropriate boxes, meriting a completeresponse, and over one-fifth listed from three to five events in the appropriate boxes, rating asa partial response.

Interpretation

Overall, students gave a promising performance on the Critical-Reflective Comprehensionsubtest. The results for one item suggest that students are especially proficient at story mapping(item 37). It is significant that nearly all students responded to each item on this subtest, withover nine-tenths selecting the correct response for the one choice item and approximately three-to four-fifths providing complete or partial responses for each of the five open-ended items.

These data provide evidence that almost all students interacted with the reading materials andthe majority achieved varying degrees of success in evaluating the implications of text at acritical-reflective level.

Although a substantial percentage of students demonstrated effective critical-reflectivecomprehension skills, many were unable to process and/or express their thinking fully,consistently or appropriately at this cognitive level. The data suggesting that many students havedifficulty responding to questions demanding critical-reflective comprehension do not give a clearindication of whether this difficulty is due to deficiencies in the students' critical-reflectivethinking or to their inexperience in expressing that thinking in written form. For one item thequestion itself may have posed a problem for students, in which case the result may reflect analternative subjective interpretation of a question rather than an inability to perform a task (item67).

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program41

a

23

READING STRATEGIES AND PROCESS SKILLS

ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 11, 17, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 34Dichotomous (Yes or No): 64, 65, 66Open-ended: 8

OBJECTIVE: Reading Strategies and Process Skills

Recognizing the use of, and interaction between, the thinking andmetacognitive strategies involved in the reading process.

Adapting and varying the use of these strategies at a conscious level accordingto the demands of the text and/or reading situation.

The assessment of reading strategies and process skills is a relatively new area of assessment inManitoba. Formally included for the first time in the 1992 Reading Assessment, this subtest wasintended to reinforce student awareness of the need to examine reading strategies and processskills at a conscious level. However, the selection of reading strategies assessed was neithercomprehensive nor necessarily representative of the repertoire of strategies to which studentsneed to be, or are being, exposed. Consequently, the results for this subtest may not bereflective of the full extent or range of students' abilities in this area. The subtest data must beinterpreted with some caution.

The grade 4 Reading Assessment included fourteen items focusing on various reading strategiesand on the application of these strategies before, during and after reading. Three of the itemsdealt with expository text, and eleven related to narrative text. Although several of these itemsappeared individually, most were presented in groups. All but one of the items on this subtestwere presented in the choice format, which required students to select appropriate strategies,rather than propose strategies.

Because there was considerable room for subjectivity in responding to the thirteen choice itemson this subtest, most of the response options could not be classified as right or wrong. Therewere preferred responses for all the items, however. These were identified as expected responsesin the Scoring Key and in the Preliminary Report.

The one open-ended item in this section of the assessment was scored on the standard four-pointrubric: Complete (C), Partial (P), Wrong (W), No Response (NR).

RESULTS

Table 12 below shows the percentage of students choosing the expected responses for therespective items on the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest.

4 2


24

TABLE 12

READING STRATEGIES AND PROCESS SKILLSMULTIPLE-CHOICE, DICHOTOMOUS AND OPEN-ENDED ITEMS



Item Type ofText

Type ofStrategy Percentage of Students Providing Expected Responses

242526

17

2930

11

272834

NarrationNarrationNarration

ExpositionNarrationNarration

ExpositionNarrationNarrationNarration

Pre-ReadingPre-ReadingPre-Reading

Post-ReadingPost-ReadingPost-Reading

During-ReadingDuring-ReadingDuring-ReadingDuring-Reading

58.6 %24.339.3

62.546.148.0

84.489.514.066.2

DICHOTOMOUS ITEMS

61.439.580.0

646566


During-ReadingDuring-ReadingDuring-Reading

OPEN-ENDED ITEM


Item Type ofText

Type ofStrategy

Complete Partial Wrong NR

8 Exposition During-Reading 20.8% 45.4% 29.4% 4.4%

Of the fourteen items comprising this subtest, three dealt with the use of pre-reading strategies,three with post-reading strategies, and eight with during-reading strategies. The results for thesegroups of items are presented in separate sections below, along with the frequency distributionof responses (see Tables 13, 14 and 15). In general, the response options for these itemsinvolved a great deal of reading.


e25

Pre-Reading Strategies (Items 24, 25, 26)

In addition to serving as focusing questions for the story, "William and Boomer," three of theassessment items relating to Reading Strategies and Process Skills reinforced the need to thinkabout a given text before reading, as an aid to understanding the text (items 24, 25, 26). Theseitems asked students to identify the strategy, from a list of four, that they would find mosthelpful in preparing to read. Both the focusing question and the instructions preceding theseitems provided contextual clues for identifying the expected responses, each of which focusedon the need to anticipate, or establish some expectations about, the possible content/purpose ofthe reading material. Students were expected to choose the following options in responding tothe statement, "Before I begin reading, it's a good idea to":

make some guesses about what I think will happen in the story (selected by nearlythree-fifths of the studentsitem 24);use my questions and guesses as a reason for reading the story (selected by close to aquarteritem 25);think of what the people in the story might be like (selected by nearly two-fifthsitem 26).

On average, less than half the students selected the expected responses for these three items (seeTable 13 below).

TABLE 13

PRE - READING STRATEGIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Frequency Distribution of Responses

Item Type of Text A B C D NR

24 Narration 15.4% 12.9% 58.6% 13.2% 0.0%25 Narration 40.6 24.3 30.5 4.4 0.226 Narration 11.2 29.2 39.3 20.2 0.2

NOTE: the figures underlined represent the expected responses for therespective items.

The items focusing on pre-reading strategies were preceded by three sets of instructions, whichmay have created confusion for some students. After being asked to make predictions about"William and Boomer," students were encouraged to think about the "kinds of things [they]can do to help them understand a story" before reading it. The statement immediately precedingthe three items instructed students to identify the one answer, from four possible answers, "thatwould help [them] the most to get ready to read" without specifying any particular type of textor reading situation. Students may have been confused about whether the items referredspecifically to "William and Boomer," to any kind of story, or to any type of text.

44


26

Furthermore, students may have been uncertain whether the things they could do to help them"get ready to read" referred to pre-reading strategies that help them understand what they read,or to other practical considerations, some of which would be determined by reading contextand/or specific text (e.g., length of time available, length of text). Although there was anexpected or preferred response for each item, students could not be faulted for choosing analternative response based on their subjective interpretation of the task. Thus, the results forthese items do not necessarily give an accurate indication of the pre-reading strategies studentsare or are not using.

During-Reading Strategies (Items 8, 11, 27, 28, 34, 64, 65, 66)

The eight items focusing on during-reading strategies required various kinds of responses: oneasked for an open-ended response; four presented a choice of four response options; and threepresented two response options. For a frequency distribution of responses see Table 14 below.

TABLE 14

DURING-READING STRATEGIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)



OPEN-ENDED ITEM

8 Exposition 20.8% 45.4% 29.4% 4.4%

MULTIPLE-CHOICEITEMS

A B C D

11

272834

ExpositionNarrationNarrationNarration

4.689.5

84.4 7.03.13.91.5

3.53.9

14.0

0.40.00.72.0

3.580.711.6

0.718.6 66.2

DICHOTOMOUS ITEMS Yes No

646566


61.4 37.559.618.4

1.1

0.91.3

39.580.0

NOTE: the figures underlined represent the expected responses for the respective items.


27

Two items asked students to note which strategy, from a list of four possible strategies, they findmost helpful while reading, although neither the type of text nor the reading context wasspecified. For one of the items, close to nine-tenths of the students selected the expectedresponse which focused on monitoring understanding while reading (item 27). In contrast, littlemore than a tenth of the responses selected for the second item corresponded with the expectedresponse, which focused on assessing whether the reading material verified or contradicted thereader's expectations or predictions (item 28). For the latter item, approximately four-fifths ofthe students selected the response or strategy of taking care not to skip any parts of the story.

In addition to being required to identify useful reading strategies, students were expected toapply and monitor/evaluate their use of reading strategies within the context of the assessmentreading materials. Two of these items dealt with expository text. For the open-ended item,students were required to state how they arrived at their answer for the question asking them toselect the day/date on which visitors were admitted to the Fort Whyte Centre after 5:00 p.m.Two-thirds (66.2%) of the students' responses reflected either a complete or partialunderstanding of the process of referring to the appropriate text and noting the precise locationwithin the text providing the applicable information (item 8). The multiple-choice item askedstudents to indicate what helps them find directions (North, South, East, West) on a map. Morethan four-fifths of the students reported using the compass symbol on the map (item 11).

Another item asked students to select a good strategy for determining the meaning of anunfamiliar word in a story (item 34). Two-thirds selected the strategy of reading the sentencebefore and after the one in which the unfamiliar word appears. These results suggest that themajority of students recognize the usefulness of contextual clues as a means of deriving meaningfrom text.

Three items (64, 65, 66), for each of which the expected response was "yes," inquired aboutstudents' use of specific strategies while reading the story "Salt Hands" (see Table 14 above).Just over three-fifths of the students noted that they looked back at parts of the story they hadalready read (item 64); four-fifths looked at the illustration accompanying the story (item 66);and two-fifths tried to predict what would come next in the story (item 65).

Post-Reading Strategies (Items 17, 29, 30)

Overall, approximately half the students selected the expected responses for the three itemsfocusing on strategies employed following the reading of text (see frequency distribution ofresponses in Table 15 below).

t Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program4 b

28

TABLE 15

POST-READING STRATEGIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)


Item Type of Text A B C D NR

17 Exposition 27.2% 62.5% 2.0% 6.6% 1.8%29 Narration 15.4 30.5 46.1 8.1 0.030 Narration 4.4 16.4 48.0 29.6 1.5

NOTE: the figures underlined represent the expected responses for the respectiveitems.

Two of the items dealt with narrative text, one focusing on narrative text in general and theother on a particular narrative. In responding to the item inquiring about the most helpful of fourpossible strategies to use after reading a story, just under half the students selected the expectedresponse, "it's a good idea to tell the story in my own words to make sure I understand it";nearly a third felt it was most useful to "check to see if I skipped any of the vocabulary words"(item 29).

The second narrative-related item referred specifically to the story, "William and Boomer,"which describes how William learns to swim. Students were asked to indicate which of fourapproaches they would use "to make a list of what William had to learn before being able toswim" (item 30). Almost half the students indicated they would "re-read the story and makea list of William's activities in learning to swim," which was the expected response; over aquarter opted for "re-read[ing] the story and mak[ing] a list of the things William learned thatsummer"; and close to a fifth chose the option of "re- read[ing] the story and mak[ing] a list ofthe things William and Boomer did together." The group of students selecting the expectedresponse demonstrated their awareness of the need to isolate/focus on relevant information withina given text. However, the latter two options were also valid, considering that the term "beingable to swim" could be interpreted as getting permission to swim rather than developing theability to swim.

For the final item, students were expected to identify in which of four possible sections in alibrary they would be able to find additional information on the Fort Whyte Centre. Essentially,this task consisted of identifying the genre under which informational text belongs or isclassified. Over three-fifths of the students noted appropriately that the relevant informationwould be located in the non-fiction section of the library, whereas over a quarter indicated theywould look for it in the fiction section (item 17).


29

Interpretation

Students may have been confused about certain tasks required in the Reading Strategies andProcess Skills subtest since the wording of some questions and the instructions preceding themallowed for diverse interpretations. Therefore, some of the results may be more of a reflectionof a subjective interpretation than of an ability or inability to identify or apply a particularreading strategy.

Several observations can be made, however, on the basis of student responses. Overall, a slightlyhigher percentage of students provided the expected responses for the items relating toduring-reading strategies than for those asking about pre- and post-reading strategies, which maybe an indication that students' during-reading strategies are somewhat better developed than theirpre- and post-reading strategies. Furthermore, the majority of students did not report using thestrategy of prediction about a given text either prior to reading (items 25, 26) or during reading(items 28, 65). This indicates that students do not identify prediction as a strategy they use; itdoes not necessarily establish that they do not use prediction.

While the results for the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest are largely inconclusive,they do suggest that grade 4 students have limited knowledge about and/or experience in makinga conscious assessment of their reading strategies and articulating what they perceive themselvesto be doing in the reading process.

STUDENT READING SURVEY

ITEMS: 38-55

The grade 4 Reading Survey inquired about students' self-perception as readers, their attitudestoward reading, and their reading activities at home and at school. They were not asked tospecify what language they were reading. In the instructions preceding the survey, students wereassured that the sere no right or wrong responses and encouraged to answer all questions ashonestly as they

Of the eighteen items comprising the reading survey, fifteen were presented in themultiple-choice format requiring students to select one of four possible response options; onewas a multiple-selection item asking students to circle all applicable options from a choice offifteen; and two were open-ended items requiring written responses. The scoring rubric outlinedspecific criteria for grouping the open-ended responses.


30

Students' Self-Assessment As Readers

As reported in Table 16 below, virtually all the grade 4 students surveyed professed to enjoyreading: over three-fifths chose the option, "I like to read," and nearly a third chose the option,"I like to read sometimes" (item 38). When asked to assess their competency as readers (item39), nearly half the students identified themselves as good readers, over a quarter judgedthemselves to be average readers, and just over a fifth noted they were not sure what kind ofreaders they were. Significantly, only 0.7% classified themselves as poor readers, and only2.8% claimed not to like/have an interest in reading (see Table 16).

Somewhat contradictory responses were selected for the items asking for an identification of themost difficult aspect of reading and the strategy with which reading could be improved (seeTable 16). While approximately a third of the respondents noted that "nothing about reading isdifficult" for them, nearly a third reported experiencing the greatest difficulty "knowing thewords," just over a quarter indicated that "understanding the story" is the most difficult partof reading, and under a tenth selected "reading fast enough" as a problem area (item 49).Although "understanding the story" (constructing meaning from text) was identified as thegreatest reading challenge by a quarter of the respondents, only 3.1% felt they could becomebetter readers by "reading for meaning" (item 40). (Students may not have understood what wasmeant by "reading for meaning ".) Almost a tenth of the students favoured "reading aloud" asa strategy for improving their reading, just over a fifth chose "reading for fun," and two-thirdschose "practicing."


S31

TABLE 16

STUDENTS' SELF-ASSESSMENT AS READERSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Item Response Options

Percentage ofStudents Selecting

Response

38. Do you like reading? a) I like to read. 62.7%b) I like to read sometimes. 32.9c) I do not like to read. 1.3d) I am not interested in reading. 1.5

39. I am: a) a good reader. 47.8b) an average reader. 28.9c) a poor reader. 0.7d) not sure what kind of reader I am. 20.6

40. I can become a better reader by: a) practicing. 66.7b) reading for meaning. 3.1c) reading for fun. 20.6d) reading aloud. 8.1

49. What is the most difficult part of a) Knowing the words. 30.7reading? b) Understanding the story. 25.9

c) Reading fast enough. 7.7d) Nothing about reading is difficult. 32.7

Personal Importance of Reading

Several survey items addressed the importance reading has for students in their personal lives.As indicated in Table 17 below, almost all students "often" or "sometimes" read for fun outof school (item 53), consider reading a good way to spend spare time (item 51), and likereceiving books for presents (item 52). While most students value reading for fun, they do notseem to view such reading as a means of becoming better readers (as shown in item 40 above,only a fifth of the students perceive "reading for fun" as a reading improvement strategy).


32

TABLE 17

PERSONAL IMPORTANCE OF READINGFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Item Students: Often Sometimes Setdom1 Never

51 view reading as a good way to spendspare time. 59.6% 32.7% 3.1% 1.8%

53 spend time reading for fun out of school. 51.5 33.1 8.3 4.6

52 like getting books for presents. 41.7 41.0 8.1 6.6

Choice of Reading Material

The reading survey also requested information on the kinds of literature students prefer to read,and the criteria they use in choosing reading material. In one item, students were asked to namethree of their favourite books, stories or authors (item 50). Approximately four-fifths (79.6%)of the students listed three distinct/different books, short stories or authors, and over a tenth(14.5%) listed one or two different works.

Students were also asked to select, from a list of fifteen different genres or types of text, thekind of reading material they usually choose to read on their own at home or at school (item 54).Just over two-thirds (67.1%) of the respondents selected four or more texts, and nearly a third(30.3%) selected from one to three texts. Judging from the percentage of students selecting fromthe respective reading materials listed below, the majority of students in grade 4 have apreference for adventure stories, mystery stories and comics:

Adventure Stories 74.6% Poetry 25.0%Mystery Stories 71.5 Science Books 20.4Comics 61.8 How-to-Books 20.2Animal Stories 41.2 History 16.9Magazines 38.8 Romance Stories 15.6Humour 36.0 Newspapers 14.7Sports Stories 33.1 Biographies 10.7Science Fiction 30.3

When asked to indicate what helps them choose to read a story or book (item 55), nearly halfthe students (46.9%) specified book handling as a criterion influencing/determining choice ofreading material, and close to a fifth (15.8%) specified genre or topic. Only a few of theresponses made reference to help from someone else (6.8%) or to authors (4.4%) as factors in

deciding what to read (the latter figure may be low because students may have made the choice


33

of author prior to choosing reading material). A substantial proportion (26.1%) of the studentseither gave no response or specified factors which did not fit under the above categories.

S

Shared and Extended Reading Experiences

Oral reading, selected by less than a tenth of the students as a method by which to improve theirreading, appears to have a more prominent place in school than at home (see Table 18 below).Slightly over two-thirds of the students reported that their teacher reads a story to the classweekly or daily (item 42). In contrast, just over a quarter noted that an adult reads a story tothem and under a third noted they read one to an adult at home weekly or daily; over two-fifthsindicated they never/almost never read a story to an adult at home, and nearly three-fifthsindicated they never/almost never have a story read to them by an adult at home (items 47, 48).Students were not asked how often they read to someone other than an adult at home, nor howoften they have opportunities to read aloud in school.

TABLE 18

FREQUENCY OF ORAL READING EXPERIENCESFrench hnmersion Program (Grade 4)

Item ActivityOnce a

DayOnce aWeek

Once aMonth

Almost Neveror Never

42 Teacher read story to class. 41.4% 25.7% 14.7% 16.0%

47 Adult reads story to students at home. 12.3 14.5 14.3 57.2

48 Students read story to adult at home. 12.9 18.2 23.0 43.9

Survey responses show that shared reading experiences with friends and classmates are acommon occurrence for less than half the students (see Table 19). Just under half (48.7%) thestudents reported talking about their reading with friends at school at least once a week or almostdaily; however, nearly a third (32.2%) indicated they never/almost never talk about or sharewhat they have read with friends at school (item 41). A similar pattern is reflected in studentresponses to the item inquiring about the frequency with which teachers initiate joint readingactivities (item 45). Close to half (46.1%) the students noted that their teacher provides themwith opportunities to work in pairs or small groups for a reading activity at least once a weekto almost every day, the remainder indicating they have occasion to participate inteacher-initiated joint reading activities at least once a month (31.4%) or never/almost never(21.1%).

52


34

The reading survey also asked students to report how often they write in a journal aboutsomething they have read (item 46). According to the survey results, a little over a quarter(28.1%) of the students make journal entries in response to their reading at least once a weekor almost every day, while close to a quarter (22.8%) do so at least once a month, and nearlyhalf (47.8%) never/almost never make reading-related journal entries (see Table 19 below).

TABLE 19

FREQUENCY OF SHARED AND EXTENDED READING EXPERIENCESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Item Students:AlmostDaily

j

At LeastOnce aWeek

At LeastOnce aMonth

AlmostNever

or Never

41 talk about or share what they have readwith friends at school. 18.0% 30.7% 16.4% 32.2%

45 work in pairs or small groups for readingactivity.

write in journal about something they

13.6 32.5 31.4 21.1

have read. 9.2 18.9 22.8 47.8

Teacher-Facilitated Use of Reading Strategies

Two survey items focused on the frequency with which teachers use specific pre-reading andpost-reading strategies to assist students in preparing for and understanding their reading.According to student responses (shown in Table 20 below), the majority of teachers infrequentlyor never use webs and/or story maps to help students understand a story (item 44), or askstudents to talk about a story before they read (item 43). Since each of these questions beganwith the words, "How often does your teacher ask/help you . . . ," some students may haveunderstood the questions to apply to them individually rather than to the class as a whole, inwhich case the results may not be an accurate reflection of classroom practice.


I

41

TABLE 20

TEACHER-FACILITATED USE OF READING STRATEGIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Item The Teacher:AlmostDaily

At LeastOnce aWeek

At LeastOnce aMonth

Almost Neveror Never

43

44

asks students to talk about a storybefore they read.

helps students understand a storyby using webs and/or story maps.

15.4%

10.7

21.3%

16.2

12.9%

24.6

49.1%

46.9

14

35


CHAPTER 3

TEACHER SURVEY RESULTS (GRADE 4)

INTRODUCTION

37

The Teacher Questionnaire accompanying the grade 4 Reading Assessment (1992) was sent toa total of 87 teachers teaching English Language Arts in the French Immersion (FI,2) program,and was completed by 69 teachers. The return rate was 79.3%.

This component of the Reading Assessment was intended to give teachers an opportunity toprovide information and express their views on the implementation, importance and/or adequacyof the following aspects of reading/English Language Arts:

teacher training and professional developmentschool organizationthe curriculumteaching materialsteaching practicesevaluation

In the final section of the survey, teachers were invited to make any additional commentsregarding the teaching of reading at the grade 4 level, as well as on the strengths and weaknessesof the grade 4 Reading Assessment.

A detailed report of the Teacher Questionnaire results follows. It is important to keep in mindthat the statistics represent the responses of teachers coming from schools of varying sizes,which affect factors such as class size, availability of resources and support services, and so on.Unless otherwise specified, the percentage figures take into account all 69 teachers completingthe questionnaire. Where reported cumulative percentages do not add up to 100%, it is due torounding-off or the omission of the non-response rate. Non-respondents are excluded from themean and median figures reported.

TEACHER TRAINING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Teaching Experience (Items I[A,

As of June 1992, the grade 4 French Immersion program teachers who completed the TeacherQuestionnaire had a median of nine years of teaching experience in total, and a median of fiveyears of experience teaching Early Years (grades K-4) English Language Arts. Over two-fifths


38

(43.4%) of the teachers reported having more than ten years of teaching experience in total(68.1% had five or more years), and a little over a tenth (13.0%) had more than ten years ofexperience teaching Early Years English Language Arts (50.7% had five or more years).Evidently some teachers now teaching grade 4 English Language Arts have spent time teachingat other levels, in other curriculum areas and/or in other programs.

Academic Training (Item I[C])

Teachers were asked to specify how many three-credit courses (half courses) they had taken intotal and in the last five years in the following two areas: the teaching of English Language Arts(Education Faculty) and the teaching of reading (Education Faculty). The non-response rate forthese survey questions was exceptionally high: a third or more of the teachers did not provideinformation on the number of courses taken in total, and over half did not provide informationon the number of courses taken during the past five years.

The survey data on the total number of three-credit courses taken indicate the following: 11.6%had taken no courses in the teaching of English Language Arts, 43.3% had taken one to fourcourses, and 11.4% had taken five or more (33.3% did not respond); and 11.6% had taken nocourses in the teaching of reading, 41.9% had taken one to four courses, and 2.8% had takenfive or more (43.5% did not respond). In total, survey respondents reported having taken amedian of 2.0 three-credit courses in the teaching of English Language Arts and 1.0 three-creditcourse in the teaching of reading. The median number of courses taken by survey respondentsin the past five years in each of these two areas was 0.0 and 0.5 respectively.

Knowledge of Reading Instruction (Item I[D])

Teachers were asked to rate their own knowledge of various areas of reading instructioncurrently emphasized in the curriculum, although they were not asked to specify how theyobtained their knowledge (that is, whether through academic course work, professionaldevelopment sessions, or their own reading).

As shown in Table 21 below, only two areas of reading instruction were "understood well" bya substantial majority of teachers: whole language was understood well by close to three-quartersof the teachers, and language across the curriculum was understood well by nearly two-thirds.A little over half the teachers also professed to have a thorough understanding of reading/writingportfolios, teaching of reading strategies, content area reading, and bulk reading, and over athird professed to have a thorough understanding of developmental reading, reader response andreading cuing systems. Significantly, from just over a quarter to almost half of the teachersconsidered themselves to have only a partial understanding of every major area of readinginstruction listed. Over a tenth claimed not to understand five of the areas.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 51;

39

TABLE 21

TEACHERS' SELF-RATED KNOWLEDGE OFREADING INSTRUCTION


Area ofReading Instruction

UnderstandWell

UnderstandPartly

Do NotUnderstand NR

1 Whole language 72.5% 27.5% 0.0% 0.0% -I

Language across the curriculum 65.2 29.0 4.3 1.4Reading/writing portfolios 56.5 39.1 4.3 0.0Teaching of reading strategies 55.1 33.3 10.1 1.4Content area reading 50.7 42.0 7.2 0.0Bulk reading 50.7 33.3 14.5 1.4Developmental reading 44.9 40.6 13.0 1.4Reading cuing systems 37.7 47.8 13.0 1.4Reader response 37.7 44.9 14.5 2.9

Professional Development in Reading/English Language Arts (Items I [E, F, G, H])

While few teachers reported having taken post-secondary courses in the teaching of readingand/or English Language Arts in the last five years, virtually all claimed to have hadopportunities to participate in professional development in these areas during that time. Of theteachers with five or more years of experience teaching Early Years English Language Arts,60.0% reported having had ten or more hours of professional development in reading/EnglishLanguage Arts available to them during the past five years, 14.3% had five to nine hours,14.3% had one to four hours, and 8.6% had no opportunities (2.9% did not respond). Bycomparison, 40.0% reported having taken ten or more hours of professional development inthese areas during the same period, 14.3% had taken five to nine hours, 8.6% had taken one tofour hours, and 5.7% had not taken any (31.4% did not respond). The median number of hoursof professional development taken by survey respondents in these areas during the past five yearswas 10.0 hours.

In assessing the usefulness of the professional development sessions in reading/English LanguageArts in which they participated during the past five years, over half (55.1%) the teachers ratedthe sessions as "extremely useful" or "very useful" and over a third (36.2%) rated them as"somewhat useful." No one judged the sessions to be lacking in usefulness (although 7.2%indicated that the question was inapplicable and 1.4% did not respond).

57


40

Survey participants were also given an opportunity to rate their need for professionaldevelopment on seven different topics. These topics are listed in Table 22 below according tothe percentage of teachers registering "great" or "some" need for professional developmentin the respective areas.

TABLE 22

TEACHER RATING OFPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TOPICS


Professional Development Topics Great + SomeNeed

GreatNeed

SomeNeed

NoNeed NR

Evaluation techniques for reading 92.7% 50.7% 42.0% 4.3% 2.9%Strategies for specific types of text andreading processes including content areareading strategies

92.7 39.1 53.6 4.3 2.9

Teaching approaches (e.g., grouping,paired learning) 79.7 30.4 49.3 18.8 1.4Available reading materials 76.8 31.9 44.9 20.3 2.9Basic reading theory 73.9 18.8 55.1 23.2 2.9Use of the curriculum documents forgrade 4 English Language Arts 72.5 17.4 55.1 24.6 2.9General philosophy of the EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum 56.5 11.6 44.9 40.6 2.9

Over three-quarters of the teachers noted a need for professional development on four of theseven specified topics: evaluation techniques for reading; strategies for specific types of text andreading processes including content area reading strategies; teaching approaches; and availablereading materials. Although close to three-quarters of the teachers also registered some or greatneed for professional development on the use of the grade 4 English Language Arts curriculumdocuments and on basic reading theory, approximately a quarter registered "no need" forsessions on these topics. Two-fifths of the respondents felt "no need" for sessions on thegeneral philosophy of the English Language Arts curriculum.

Three teachers took the opportunity to specify other areas for which they see a need forprofessional development, suggesting the following topics: whole language, spelling, research,and language arts for French Immersion.


41

Professional Literature/Resources (Item I[I])

Teachers also reported on the availability and use of professional literature and its influence ontheir current teaching practice. According to teacher responses, close to three-quarters (72.4%)of the schools make professional reading materials available to teachers weekly or monthly,15.9% do so quarterly, and 7.2% never do so (4.3% of the teachers did not respond). Thefrequency with which professional materials are made available in schools exceeds the frequencywith which teachers read articles from professional journals/books about reading/language arts.Just over half (53.6%) the teachers reported reading articles from professional literature aboutreading/language arts weekly/monthly, while over a third (36.2%) reported doing so every fourmonths, and 7.2% never do so (2.9% did not respond).

For about half the teachers the contributions/support of colleagues and administrators withrespect to promoting professional literature about reading/language arts is scarce or absentaltogether. Just over half the teachers noted that colleagues or administrators refer to suchmaterials every four months (34.8%) or never (17.4%), and just under half indicated thatadministrators encourage such reading either quarterly (29.0%) or never (20.3%). A little overtwo-fifths (43.4%) claimed to receive these two forms of professional support weekly ormonthly.

Although a tenth (10.1%) of the teachers chose not to estimate the extent to which research inreading/language arts influences their classroom teaching, more than three-quarters noted somedegree of influence: just over a third (34.8%) noted weekly or monthly influence, and a littleover two-fifths (42.0%) noted quarterly influence. Over a tenth (13.0%) indicated that researchin this area never influences their teaching practices.

Change in Teaching Practice (Item I[J, K])

A large majority (75.4%) of teachers observed changes in their teaching practice inreading/language arts over the past five years. In identifying factors contributing to thesechanges, a small majority of teachers acknowledged the influence of: professional developmentsessions/activities (62.3%), professional reading or study (55.1%), and colleagues' suggestions(50.7%). Teachers also attributed changes in their teaching practice to: change in divisional/school policy/philosophy (selected by 37.7%), and curriculum guides (selected by 17.4%).

A tenth (10.1%) of the teachers specified other factors influencing changes in their teachingpractices. Of the eight comments made, three referred to the influence of experience. Othersattributed change to a shift in teaching assignment, students' needs and students' individualprogramming, literature circles, and university courses in Immersion pedagogy.

59


42

Teacher Qualification Rating (Item I[L])

The final item in the "Teacher Training and Professional Development" section of thequestionnaire asked teachers to rate their own qualifications to teach grade 4 English LanguageArts, taking into account their university education, professional development and pastexperience. Almost three-fifths of the teachers (56.5%) rated themselves as "qualified" and overa third (37.7%) rated themselves as "very qualified." Only 4.3% felt they were "inadequatelyqualified" (and 1.4% did not respond).

SCHOOL ORGANIZATION

The second section of the Teacher Questionnaire focused on the organization of the EnglishLanguage Arts program in schools, the influence teachers have in making decisions regardinglanguage arts programming, and the availability of support services for English Language Artsteachers.

Organization of English Language Arts Program (Items II[A, B, C, D, E, F])

Of the teachers participating in the survey, nearly three-fifths (56.5%) indicated they wereteaching grade 4 English Language Arts by "assignment," whereas close to third (31.9%) weredoing so by "choice" and close to a tenth (8.7%) by "negotiated choice" (2.9% did notrespond).

As shown in Table 23 below, survey respondents reported that during the 1991-92 school yearthey were teaching a median of 1 English Language Arts class (66.7% of the teachers wereteaching one class and 18.8% were teaching two or more classes), and had a median of 22English Language Arts students (4.3% had from one to fourteen students, 81.2% had fromfifteen to thirty, and 13.0% had more than thirty). In 1991-92, the "median" grade 4 EnglishLanguage Arts teacher taught in a school operating on a 6-day cycle, within which a total of 180minutes (or 30 minutes per day) were available as preparation time, and 360 minutes (or 60minutes per day) were allotted to each English Language Arts class being taught. Therecommended time allotment for grade 4 English Language Arts in the French Immersionprogram is 450 minutes per 6-day cycle (or 75 minutes per day). Thus, the median timeallotments for a specific class reported by survey respondents falls short of the recommendedtime allotments.


S

43

TABLE 23

SCHOOL ORGANIZATION PROFILE (1991-1992)French Immersion Program (Grade 4)

Survey Questions

Teacher Responses

Mean Median

How many days are in your school cycle? 5.8 6.0

How many minutes are allotted to each grade 4 English LanguageArts class you teach?

per cycle: 339.9 360.0per day: 58.2 60.0

.

How many minutes preparation time do you have?per cycle: 179.7 180.0per day: 30.9 30.0

How many English Language Arts classes do you teach this year? 1.4 1.0

To how many students do you teach English Language Arts thisyear? 24.8 22.0

Teacher Influence in Decision Making (Item II[G])

Teachers were requested to rate the degree of influence they have over various decisionsconcerning the organization and teaching of grade 4 English Language Arts in their respectiveschools. According to the teacher responses reported in Table 24 below, little more than a tenthof the teachers feel they have "great influence" regarding the overall time allotment of theEnglish Language Arts program, whereas over four-fifths consider themselves to have extensiveinfluence over the division of time for the various dimensions of the English Language Arts

program.

6 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

44

TABLE 24

TEACHER INFLUENCE OVER DECISIONS CONCERNINGTHE TEACHING OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS


Area of InfluenceGreat

InfluenceSome

InfluenceLittle/NoInfluence NR

The division of time within the ELA's timeallotment (reading, writing, listening,speaking, viewing, language study, literature) 82.6% 7.2% 7.2% 2.9%Choice of teaching methods/strategies 79.7 17.4 1.4 1.4Choice of learning strategies to teach 79.7 17.4 1.4 1.4Choice of evaluation methods/instruments 69.6 24.6 4.3 1.4Choice of teaching materials/reading program 59.4 36.2 2.9 1.4The amount and kind of professionaldevelopment 27.5 43.5 26.1 2.9Materials added to the school library 20.3 68.1 8.7 2.9The overall time allotment 14.5 14.5 68.1 2.9

The survey data indicate that teachers see themselves as having the greatest degree of influenceover decisions directly related to their individual approach to teaching/learning. For example,approximately four-fifths of the teachers claimed to have "great influence" over choice oflearning strategies to teach and choice of teaching methods/strategies. Teachers appear to havesomewhat less influence in other areas related to teaching content and curriculumimplementation: a little over two-thirds of the teachers reported having "great influence" overchoice of evaluation methods/instruments, and about three-fifths gave the same rating withrespect to choice of teaching materials/reading program.

The survey responses further suggest that teachers feel they have significantly lessdecision - making power in relation to teaching resources. A fifth of the teachers viewedthemselves as having a great deal of influence over the selection of school library materials, andjust over a quarter considered themselves to have great influence over the amount and kind ofprofessional development available to them (about a quarter felt they had little or none). Noteachers responded to the opportunity to specify other areas in which they have and/or lackinfluence.


45

Availability of Support Services (Item II[H])

Survey participants were given an opportunity to comment on the extent to which specific typesof support services are available in their schools, choosing one of three response options: "veryavailable," "available," and "not avai able." When reviewing the teacher ratings reported inTable 25 below, it is important to keep 'At mind that the availability of resources is dependentupon the size, clientele needs and polic7. .gxisions of schools/divisions represented in the survey.

TABLE 25

TEACHER RATING OFAVAILABILITY OF SUPPORT SER7ICES IN SCHOOLS


Type of Support ServiceVery

Available AvailableNot

Available NR

Resource teacher(s) 27.5% 68.1% 4.3% 0.0%Library technician(s) 21.7 62.3 10.1 5.8Qualified teacher-librarian(s) 20.3 39.1 36.2 4.3Teacher aide(s) 11.6 65.2 23.2 0.0Speech pathologist(s) 8.7 84.1 5.8 1.4Divisional consultant(s) 5.8 66.7 24.6 2.9Department head or team leader(s) 5.8 30.4 60.9 2.9Special education teacher(s) 4.3 33.3 59.4 2.9

According to the teacher ratings, department head or team leaders and special education teachersare "not available" to three-fifths of the teachers, qualified teacher-librarians are "notavailable" to over a third, divisional consultants and teacher aides are "not available" to almosta quarter. Only three of the support services appear to be readily available to more than a fifthof the teachers: resource teachers, library technicians, and qualified teacher-librarians. Twoteachers commented on the availability of other types of support services, specifically noting theassistance of parents and student teachers.

63


46

THE CURRICULUM

In addition to requesting information on the availability of the Early Years English LanguageArts curriculum documents (item III[A]), the third section of the Teacher Questionnaire askedteachers to estimate the extent to which they understand and use the English Language Artscurriculum (items III [B,C]) and assess the need for revision of the Early Years EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum documents (item III[D]).

Table 26 below shows that a little over half the teachers claimed to have a copy of the EnglishLanguage Arts: Overview K-12 (1988), just over two-thirds had a copy of the English LanguageArts: Early Years (1982) curriculum guide, and four-fifths had a copy of Curriculum Guide:Grades 1-2-3-4: FL2 (1985). The majority of teachers professed to make infrequent or no useof these three documents. Approximately two-fifths indicated that they never use the Overview,which outlines the foundational goals and objectives of the curriculum.

TABLE 26

AVAILABILITY AND TEACHER USE OFCURRICULUM DOCUMENTS


CurriculumDocument

Teacher Has Copy Teacher Uses Document

Yes No N/A NR Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never NR

English Language Arts:Overview K-12 (1988) 55.1 % 37.7% 0.0% 7.2% 0.0% 7.2% 36.2% 39.1 % 17.4%English Language Arts:Early Years (1982) 68.1 27.5 0.0 4.3 0.0 13.0 40.6 31.9 14.5

Curriculum Guide:Grades 1-2-3-4: FL2(1985) 79.7 11.6 2.9 5.8 13.0 17.4 43.5 17.4 8.7

The six teachers who provided explanations of why they rarely or never use one or more of thedocuments cited a variety of different reasons, including the following: three made a distinctionbetween using the documents regularly and consulting them when needed (e.g., when planningfor a year or segment of a course); one commented on the organization of the guides; onereferred to the use of other resources; and one claimed not to have access to a document.


64

47

One item in this section of the survey gave teachers an opportunity to rate the need for revisionof the curriculum documents (item III[D]). As reported in Table 27 below, from approximatelya third to just over half the teachers noted satisfaction with the three English documents, EnglishLanguage Arts: Overview K-12, English Language Arts: Early Years, and Curriculum Guide:Grades 1-2-3-4: FL2.; over a tenth registered dissatisfaction with the Overview, and close to aquarter registered dissatisfaction with the other two guides.The non-response rate for this itemranged from 24.6% to 44.9%.

TABLE 27

TEACHER RATING OFNEED FOR REVISION OF CURRICULUM DOCUMENTS


Satisfactory/Does Unsatisfactory/Curriculum Document Not Need Revision Needs Revision NR

English Language Arts: Overview K-12 (1988) 42.0% 13.0% 44.9%English Language Arts: Early Years (1982) 34.8 23.2 42.0Curriculum Guide: Grades 1-2-3-4: FL2 (1985) 52.2 23.2 24.6

Although only a small percentage of teachers reported making frequent use of the curriculumdocuments, almost all (92.7%) rated their knowledge of the grade 4 English Language Artscurriculum documents as "adequate" or "very adequate." Furthermore, nearly all teachersconsidered themselves to have an adequate or highly adequate understanding of what grade 4students should be doing in English Language Arts (97.1%) and of the teaching strategiesappropriate for grade 4 English Language Arts (92.7%). Only a few teachers reported havingan "inadequate" understanding of these three areas.

TEACHING MATERIALS

The "Teaching Materials" section of the Teacher Questionnaire inquired about the type, range,quality and availability of materials used in teaching grade 4 English Language Arts. The firstitem presented a list of ten different types of teaching materials and asked teachers to estimatethe frequency with which they used the materials in their reading/English Language Artsprogram in the 1991-92 school year (item IV[A]). Table 28 below lists the respective teachingmaterials according to the reported frequency of "weekly" and "monthly" use combined.


48

TABLE 28

TEACHING MATERIALS USED INREADING/ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS PROGRAM (1991-1992)


Materials Used

Frequency of Use

Weekly +Monthly Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never NR

Reference materials 69.6% 40.6% 29.0% 20.3% 5.8% 4.3%Content area material 66.6 39.1 27.5 14.5 7.2 11.6Integrated language series 65.2 37.7 27.5 18.8 7.2 8.7Student-authored materials(e.g., anthologies) 65.2 36.2 29.0 26.1 2.9 5.8Computers 63.7 47.8 15.9 14.5 18.8 2.9Videotapes/films, audiotapes 53.6 8.7 44.9 39.1 4.3 2.9Newspapers, magazines 47.8 18.8 29.0 43.5 4.3 4.3Basal readers 43.4 24.6 18.8 20.3 31.9 4.3Trade literature 40.5 15.9 24.6 .1.7 24.6 13.0Environmental print(e.g., ads, brochures) 36.2 8.7 27.5 52.2 4.3 7.2

The survey results indicate that teachers are using a variety of different teaching materials in thegrade 4 reading/English Language Arts program, although the frequency of use variesconsiderably. Approximately two-thirds of the teachers estimated that in 1991-92 they madeweekly or monthly use of: reference materials; content area materials; integrated language series;student-authored materials; and computers. From just over a third to just over half the teachersalso reported making weekly/monthly use of: videotapes/films, audiotapes; newspapers/magazines; basal readers; trade literature; and environmental print. A quarter of the teachersnever used trade literature and nearly a third never used basal readers in the reading/EnglishLanguage Arts program during the 1991-92 school year.

Teachers were also invited to rate various factors influencing the choice and quality of EnglishLanguage Arts materials used in the 1991-92 school year (item IV[B]). The ratings presentedin Table 29 below indicate that nearly all teachers feel they have good or excellent access to avariety of materials and that the quality and relevance of available materials is good or excellent.The range of reading levels in available materials was considered to be good or excellent by overthree-quarters of the respondents. A small majority also gave ratings of good or excellent to:Canadian content of available materials; access to information about new materials; and accessto commercial teacher guides.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 6 6

47

One item in this section of the survey gave teachers an opportunity to rate the need for revisionof the curriculum documents (item III[D]). As reported in Table 27 below, from approximatelya third to just over half the teachers noted satisfaction with the three English documents, EnglishLanguage Arts: Overview K-12, English Language Arts: Early Years, and Curriculum Guide:Grades 1-2-3-4: FL2.; over a tenth registered dissatisfaction with the Overview, and close to aquarter registered dissatisfaction with the other two guides.The non-response rate for this itemranged from 24.6% to 44.9%.

TABLE 27

TEACHER RATING OFNEED FOR REVISION OF CURRICULUM DOCUMENTS


Satisfactory/Does Unsatisfactory/Curriculum Document Not Need Revision Needs Revision NR

English Language Arts: Overview K-12 (1988) 42.0% 13.0% 44.9%English Language Arts: Early Years (1982) 34.8 23.2 42.0Curriculum Guide: Grades 1-2-3-4: FL, (1985) 52.2 23.2 24.6

Although only a small percentage of teachers reported making frequent use of the curriculumdocuments, almost all (92.7%) rated their knowledge of the grade 4 English Language Artscurriculum documents as "adequate" or "very adequate." Furthermore, nearly all teachersconsidered themselves to have an adequate or highly adequate understanding of what grade 4students should be doing in English Language Arts (97.1%) and of the teaching strategiesappropriate for grade 4 English Language Arts (92.7%). Only a few teachers reported havingan "inadequate" understanding of these three areas.

TEACHING MATERIALS

The "Teaching Materials" section of the Teacher Questionnaire inquired about the type, range,quality and availability of materials used in teaching grade 4 English Language Arts. The firstitem presented a list of ten different types of teaching materials and asked teachers to estimatethe frequency with which they used the materials in their reading/English Language Artsprogram in the 1991-92 school year (item IV[A]). Table 28 below lists the respective teachingmaterials according to the reported frequency of "weekly" and "monthly" use combined.

6 7


48

TABLE 28



Materials Used

Frequency of Use


Reference materials 69.6% 40.6% 29.0% 20.3% 5.8% 4.3%Content area material 66.6 39.1 27.5 14.5 7.2 11.6Integrated language series 65.2 37.7 27.5 18.8 7.2 8.7Student-authored materials(e.g., anthologies) 65.2 36.2 29.0 26.1 2.9 5.8Computers 63.7 47.8 15.9 14.5 18.8 2.9Videotapes/films, audiotapes 53.6 8.7 44.9 39.1 4.3 2.9Newspapers, magazines 47.8 18.8 29.0 43.5 4.3 4.3Basal readers 43.4 24.6 18.8 20.3 31.9 4.3Trade literature 40.5 15.9 24.6 21.7 24.6 13.0Environmental print(e.g., ads, brochures) 36.2 8.7 27.5 52.2 4.3 7.2

The survey results indicate that teachers are using a variety of different teaching materials in thegrade 4 reading/English Language Arts program, although the frequency of use variesconsiderably. Approximately two-thirds of the teachers estimated that in 1991-92 they madeweekly or monthly use of: reference materials; content area materials; integrated language series;student-authored materials; and computers. From just over a third to just over half the teachersalso reported making weekly/monthly use of: videotapes/films, audiotapes; newspapers/magazines; basal readers; trade literature; and environmental print. A quarter of the teachersnever used trade literature and nearly a third never used basal readers in the reading/EnglishLanguage Arts program during the 1991-92 school year.

Teachers were also invited to rate various factors influencing the choice and quality of EnglishLanguage Arts materials used in the 1991-92 school year (item IV[B]). The ratings presentedin Table 29 below indicate that nearly all teachers feel they have good or excellent access to avariety of materials and that the quality and relevance of available materials is good or excellent.The range of reading levels in available materials was considered to be good or excellent by overthree-quarters of the respondents. A small majority also gave ratings of good or excellent to:Canadian content of available materials; access to information about new materials; and accessto commercial teacher guides.


49

TABLE 29

TEACHER RATING OFACCESS TO AND CONTENT OF TEACHING MATERIALS


Excellent+Good Excellent Good Fair Poor NR

Access to a variety of materials 91.3% 33.3% 58.0% 5.8% 1.4% 1.4%Quality and relevance of materials available 91.3 23.2 68.1 5.8 1.4 1.4Range of reading levels in available material 78.3 20.3 58.0 17.4 1.4 2.9Access to commercial teacher guides 59.4 13.0 46.4 27.5 10.1 2.9Canadian content of available materials 57.9 7.2 50.7 31.9 7.2 2.9Access to information about new materials 57.9 7.2 50.7 30.4 10.1 1.4

Close to three-quarters (71.0%) of the survey participants noted that they are able to purchasematerials not on the Manitoba authorized textbook list (item IV[C]). However, less than a fifth(17.4%) of the teachers indicated that their school has a review process for evaluating thesematerials (item IV[D]).

TEACHING PRACTICES

The purpose of this section of the Teacher Questionnaire was to obtain information on the rangeand balance of teaching strategies practiced by grade 4 English Language Arts teachers, and theimportance educators ascribe to various reading activities, strategies and skills.

Teaching Strategies Used (Item VIA])

Survey participants were asked to specify how often they use various teacher-centered andstudent-centered activities in their teaching of reading/English Language Arts. The activities arelisted in Table 30 below according to reported frequency of "daily" and "weekly" usecombined.

6:3

Reading Final Report, French Immersion r'rogretm

50

TABLE 30

TEACHING STRATEGIES USED INREADING/ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS PROGRAM


Frequency of Use

Strategies Used Daily +Weekly Daily Weekly Monthly Never NR

Teacher-Centered Activities

Large-group discussion 94.2% 49.3% 44.9% 1.4% 0.0% 4.3%Mini-lesson to whole class 88.4 37.7 50.7 5.8 0.0 5.8Reading aloud to class 85.5 58.0 27.5 10.1 1.4 2.9Lecture to whole class(little discussion) 56.5 17.4 39.1 21.7 15.9 5.8

Student-Centered Activities

Uninterrupted Sustained SilentReading (USSR) 91.3 65.2 26.1 7.2 0.0 1.4Small-group work fordiscussion/sharing/assignments 84.1 29.0 55.1 14.5 0.0 1.4Peer tutoring 78.2 21.7 56.5 15.9 2.9 2.9Reader response logs /journals 56.5 15.9 40.6 26.1 15.9 1.4Bulk reading 50.7 21.7 29.0 20.3 15.9 13.0Reading conferences 37.6 7.2 30.4 50.7 7.2 4.3Cross-age reading 31.9 5.8 26.1 20.3 43.5 4.3Readers theatre 5.8 0.0 5.8 44.9 42.0 7.2

The survey data suggest that teacher-centered strategies are commonly practiced in most grade 4English Language Arts classrooms: more than four-fifths of the teachers lead large-groupdiscussion, present mini-lessons to the whole class, and read aloud to the class daily or weekly.The delivery of whole-class lectures is a less common practice than other types ofteacher-centered activities: close to three-fifths of the teachers reported lecturing daily or weekly,while just over a fifth reported doing so monthly, and close to a fifth never do so.

Three of the eight student-centered activities were identified by over three-quarters of theteachers as being in daily/weekly use in their classrooms: Uninterrupted Sustained Silent Reading(USSR), small-group work (for discussion, sharing, and assignment completion), and peertutoring. Approximately two- to three-fifths of the teachers also reported making daily/weeklyuse of: reader response logs or journals, bulk reading, and reading conferences. Just overtwo-fifths of the respondents indicated that they never include cross-age reading and readerstheatre in the reading/English Language Arts program.


51

Importance of Teaching Practices (Item V[B])

The second item in this section of the questionnaire asked teachers to rate the importance ofvarious instructional objectives/goals, reading activities/strategies, and prcicess skills currentlyemphasized in the reading/English Language Arts curriculum. According to the surveyresponses, reported in Table 31 below, each aspect of the reading program listed in the surveyholds a place of importance for nearly all teachers, only the degree of importance varies.

The majority of teachers assigned a rating of "very important" to ten of the eleven readingprogram components listed: more than four-fifths of the teachers emphasized the importance ofvariety of reading material, opportunities for personal response, pre-reading activities and settingpurpose for reading, and oral discussion of materials read; approximately two-thirds ascribedgreat importance to collaborative learning experiences, differentiated learning experiences,student understanding and use of specific strategies for reading different types of materials,flexibility of reading rate, and student understanding of the three major cuing systems in reading;and half the teachers considered oral reading fluency to be of great importance. Although studentknowledge of literary concepts was rated as somewhat important by a small majority of teachers,it ranked high in importance for little more than a third.

TABLE 31

TEACHER RATING OFIMPORTANCE OF READING PROGRAM COMPONENTS


Dimension ofReading Program

VeryImportant

SomewhatImportant

NotImportant NR

Variety of reading material 94.2% 4.3% 0.0% 1.4%Opportunities for personal response 84.1 14.5 0.0 1.4Pre-reading activities and setting purposefor reading 84.1 10.1 2.9 2.9Oral discussion of materials read 81.2 17.4 0.0 1.4Collaborative learning experiences 71.0 24.6 0.0 4.3Differentiated learning experiences 68.1 30.4 0.0 1.4Student understanding and use of specificstrategies for reading different types ofmaterials 68.1 24.6 0.0 7.2Flexibility of reading rate (silent reading) 65.2 27.5 1.4 5.8Student understanding of the three majorcuing systems in reading 65.2 27.5 2.9 4.3Oral reading fluency 50.7 46.4 1.4 1.4Student knowledge of literary concepts 36.2 55.1 4.3 4.3


52

EVALUATION

In the "Evaluation" section of the survey, teachers had an opportunity to give their opinions asto the importance of a variety of products and processes for evaluating students in reading (itemVI[A]). As shown in the ratings reported in Table 32 below, the majority of teachers ascribedsome or great importance to each of the products and processes listed, which suggests that theyvalue the use of a wide range of products and processes in assessing reading.

TABLE 32

TEACHER RATING OFIMPORTANCE OF EVALUATION PRODUCTS AND PROCESSES


Type of EvaluationVery

ImportantSomewhatImportant

NotImportant NR

Evaluations Focusing on Product:

Daily work assignments 72.5% 24.6% 1.4% 1.4%Reading/writing portfolios 72.5 23.2 0.0 4.3Projects/presentations 71.0 26.1 0.0 2.9Reading response journals or logs 58.0 37.7 2.9 1.4Bulk reading lists and experiences 34.8 49.3 10.1 5.8Informal reading inventories 33.3 56.5 7.2 2.9Cloze tests 33.3 47.8 11.6 7.2Oral tests 27.5 62.3 7.2 2.9Written tests or examinations 20.3 55.1 20.3 4.3Standardized tests 5.8 47.8 42.0 4.3

Evaluations Focusing on Process:

Attitudes to reading 89.9 8.7 0.0 1.4Group participation 76.8 21.7 0.0 1.4Individual conferencing 75.4 21.7 0.0 2.9Observation 72.5 26.1 0.0 1.4Self-evaluation 62.3 34.8 0.0 2.9Strategy evaluation 40.6 49.3 2.9 7.2Peer evaluation 31.9 58.0 7.2 2.9

Of the seven evaluation processes listed, five were considered by more than three-fifths of theteachers to be "very important" means of evaluating students in reading: attitudes to reading,group participation, individual conferencing, observation, and self-evaluation. Strategy evaluationranked high in importance for two-fifths of the teachers, and peer evaluation for just under athird.


72

53

Close to three-quarters of the teachers gave a "very important" rating to three of the ten typesof evaluations focusing on product: daily work assignments, reading/writing portfolios, andprojects/presentations. Less formally structured products such as bulk reading lists andexperiences and informal reading inventories were regarded highly by about one-third of theteachers, and reading response journals or logs by just under three-fifths. The four types of testsranked high in importance for only a small percentage of the teachers: doze tests were creditedwith great importance by a third of the respondents, oral tests by a little over a quarter, writtentests or examinations by a fifth, and standardized tests by 5.8% (the latter two types of testswere dismissed as unimportant by about one-fifth and two-fifths of the teachers respectively).

Eight teachers responded to the invitation to comment on any other types of evaluation employedduring the past year (item VI[B]). While some referred to or elaborated on the various types ofevaluations listed in the questionnaire, others noted additional means of assessment such as dailyanecdotal notes, spelling tests, surprise testing of grammar concepts, comprehension testing, andevaluation of student work at centres.

The final question relating to student evaluation inquired about the percentage of time teachersspend in formative evaluation and summative evaluation respectively (item VI[C]). Based ontheir responses, grade 4 English Language Arts teachers spend a median of 67% of theirevaluation time in formative evaluation, and a median of 33% in summative evaluation.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Survey participants were given an opportunity to make additional comments regarding theteaching of reading in grade 4 (item VII[A]). Almost a third (31.9%) of the teachers respondedwith comments: four teachers reflected on student needs or attitudes and four on teacherattitudes; two made observations about teaching approaches or techniques; three commented onreading materials (including novel studies); four offered suggestions and opinions regarding thecurriculum; one focused on time limitations; and five identified professional development needs.

Teachers were also invited to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the grade 4 ReadingAssessment (item VII[B]). Just over a third (34.8%) of the survey participants offeredcomments: one teacher felt unqualified to make observations due to lack of involvement in theassessment; eleven made positive comments and seven made negative comments about theassessment in general; two referred to specific reading materials; three expressed views on thedifficulty level of the test; one remarked on the testing population; one made suggestions

55

CHAPTER 4

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (GRADE 4)

The Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the results of each component of the grade 4Reading Assessment. The following discussion represents the committee's findings andconclusions drawn from the student reading test and reading survey results as well as the teachersurvey results. A set of recommendations based on the committee's findings appears at theconclusion of the discussion.

STUDENT TEST RESULTS

Response Rate

The response rate was remarkably high for virtually every item on the grade 4 ReadingAssessment, regardless of the type of task or response format required. This reflects a high levelof interact' .)n with the assessment reading materials on the part of students, as well as areadiness to process a variety of different texts at various cognitive levels.

Meaning Vocabulary Subtest

Students gave a strong performance on the Meaning Vocabulary subtest. In general, studentswere more successful at understanding words for which explicit contextual clues were availablethan those for which they were required to infer meaning from implicit contextual clues or fromprevious experience. Words conveying abstract concepts posed greater difficulty for studentsthan those conveying concrete concepts. These findings are compatible with the concreteoperational stage of development which characterizes many grade 4 students.

Literal Comprehension Subtest

Overall, the results for the Literal Comprehension subtest show that students havewell-developed skills in deriving literal meaning from various types of text. Some areas ofinexperience and/or weakness are, however, also apparent in student responses.

74


56

It may be noteworthy that the two multiple-choice items on this subtest (items 6 and 7) resultingin the lowest percentage of correct responses both dealt with expository text. Each of these itemsinvolved highly complex processing of expository text, and thus ranked high on the continuumof difficulty in literal comprehension. Item 6 demanded complex map reading skills whichapproximately three-fifths of the students were able to perform successfully. Item 7, for whichthe majority of students chose incorrect responses, required students to synthesize informationfrom a detailed schedule of hours of admission to the Fort Whyte Centre. As students were notactually planning to visit the Centre, they may have had limited interest in determining visitinghours. Moreover, since adults isually perform such a task for children, it is possible that thestudents had limited experience and/or prior instruction in sorting through this type ofinformation independently. Nevertheless, the reading of various types of schedules is an expectedclassroom activity. The comparatively low performance on these items suggests that studentsneed more classroom instruction and experience in reading expository texts such as schedulesand maps.

Of the four open-ended items included on this subtest, the item requiring a drawing in relationto the poem resulted in the lowest percentage of complete responses. (Although only a little overa third of the students provided complete responses, just over half provided partial responses.)This was an innovative open-ended item in that it called for a mode of response other thanwriting. Some students may have been confused by the instructions asking them to draw "onepicture" of an important section of the poem, including "as many details as possible."Furthermore, students may have lacked an internalized set of criteria for, or preconceivednotions of, what constitutes a "successful" descriptive drawing of a reading selection. Ifdrawing is not used as a tool for language reception and expression in the classroom, it is notlikely to be evaluated either. To enable students to develop and practice reading comprehension,teachers not only need to encourage and provide opportunities for students to explore variousmodes of expressing reading comprehension (such as art, music, drama, and so on) but they alsoneed to use these response modes in assessing students' T6ding comprehension.

Interpretive Comprehension Subtest

The Interpretive Comprehension subtest results indicate that by the time students are in grade4 they have developed strong interpretive comprehension skills. A substantial majority ofstudents demonstrated proficiency in inferring meaning from narration, exposition and poetry.This finding may be an indication that many teachers are using an appropriate variety and rangeof reading materials to enable students to develop inferential comprehension. It may also suggestthat, in accordance with the curriculum emphasis on cooperative and collaborative learning,many teachers are exposing students to interactive experiences promoting and calling forinterpretive responses/thinking. Teachers need to be encouraged to continue using and exploringappropriate materials, strategies and activities that foster the development of interpretivecomprehension skills.


57

Critical-Reflective Comprehension Subtest

On the whole, students gave a promising performance on the Critical-Reflective Comprehensionsubtest. A significant percentage of students demonstrated effective critical-reflectivecomprehension skills, although many were unable to process their thinking fully or consistentlyat this cognitive level.

For one item (item 67) the question itself may have posed a problem for students, in which casethe result may reflect an alternative subjective interpretation of a question rather than an inabilityto perform a task. This leads to enquiry about whether assessment questions should be precededby discussion and/or explanation in order to clarify expectations. Given the developmental levelof grade 4 students, responding to questions of a critical-reflective nature would be greatlyfacilitated by such an approach.

All but one of the items on this subtest called for written responses requiring students to expressdifficult ideas about various texts using language that may not have been present in the body ofthe text. Significantly, almost all students provided responses to the open-ended items andapproximately three-fifths or more were credited with complete or partial success in theirresponses to each of these items. These data provide evidence that nearly all students attemptedto explore the implications of text at a critical-reflective level, with the majority achievingcomplete or partial success. Nevertheless, the high percentage of partially satisfactory responses(along with the wrong responses) demonstrates that a large proportion of students have difficultyresponding in written form to questions demanding critical-reflective comprehension. The resultsdo not show whether students have deficiencies in critical-reflective thinking or whether theyhave difficulties expressing that thinking in written form.

Some caution must be applied in interpreting the results for this subtest. There is a possibilitythat student performance may not be reflective or representative of what is happening in theclassroom. Grade 4 students may have experience discussing and expressing theircritical-reflective comprehension using various modes of communication, yet they may have littleexperience providing written responses to questions demanding critical-reflective thought.Therefore, a testing situation using only written response may not have fully captured studentskills in this area.

Reading Strategies and Process Skills Subtest

Several tentative conclusions can be drawn from the students' responses to the Reading Strategiesand Process Skills subtest items. On average, a slightly higher percentage of students providedthe expected responses for the items relating to during-reading strategies than for those askingabout pre- and post-reading strategies. The observation that students' pre- and post-readingstrategies may be somewhat less well developed than their during-reading strategies raises thequestion of whether the primary focus in the classroom is on strategies used while reading.

7 ti


58

There is also evidence in the data that the majority of students do not identify prediction abouta given text as a strategy they use prior to reading (items 25, 26) or during reading (items 28,65). While a substantial proportion of students did not report the use of prediction, the resultsdo not provide any clear information about the actual use of this strategy. Students may be usingthe strategy, but may not be conscious of doing so or may not be articulating its use.

These findings must be interpreted with some caution. It is important to note that students mayhave limited conscious awareness of their use of strategies and limited experience articulatingwhat they are doing with respect to reading strategies. Some questions need to be asked whenreviewing the data. Do the students' responses reflect a knowledge of what they are doing? Arestudents not using the various reading strategies? Are students using the strategies but notrecognizing when they use them? Students may be doing pre-, during- and post-reading activitiesin the classroom but may not recognize instances when they apply the reading strategiesindependently (for example, the independent selection of a book involves prediction of what thebook is about, but students may not recognize this as an application of a pre-reading strategy).

In some instances, the instructions preceding a question and/or the presentation or wording ofa question allowed for diverse interpretations, which may have created confusion about the taskrequired. Therefore, some of the results may be more of a reflection of a subjectiveinterpretation than of an ability or inability to identify or apply a particular reading strategy. Theopen-ended response format might have been more appropriate for this type of activity in thatstudents' thought processes might have been more evident.

Although the results for the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest are inconclusive, theydo suggest that grade 4 students have limited knowledge about and/or experience with the kindof self-analysis that requires them to make a conscious assessment of their reading strategies,and provide feedback on their away :ness (metacognition) of what they perceive themselves tobe doing in the reading process.


I

S

59


Students' Self-Assessment as Readers and Enjoyment of Reading

When asked to rate their qualifications as readers, nearly half the students identified themselvesas "good" readers and over a quarter rated themselves as "average" readers; however, a fifthwere not sure how to rate themselves as readers. This uncertainty suggests that many studentsare not accustomed to making this kind of self-assessment or value statement about their abilitiesas readers, and may be an indication that they regard their reading abilities non judgmentally.Asking students to describe their reading abilities might have been more appropriate thanexpecting them to rate themselves as readers.

On the whole, it appears that grade 4 students do perceive themselves positively as readers. Thisis reflected in the degree of importance reading has for them. Almost all students indicated thatthey enjoy reading, view reading as a good way to spend spare time, spend time reading for funout of school, and like receiving books for presents; however, from about one-third to two-fifthsof the students chose the qualification "sometimes" in identifying these attitudes and habits.

Choice of Reading Material

Students appear to have a clear idea of the type of reading material they usually read on theirown at home or at school. When given a list of fifteen different types of text, two-thirds of thestudents selected four or more texts as their choice of reading material. Although the surveyresults suggest that the majority of students have the greatest interest in adventure stories,mystery stories and comics, they do not establish whether students read these materials becauseof personal preference or because these are the materials available to them. Regardless ofstudents' reasons for reading these texts, it is important that educators examine the voices andvalues represented in these texts.

Book handling was the most commonly cited criterion influencing or determining choice ofreading material. This finding gives a clear message that reading material, whether in theclassroom, library, or elsewhere, needs to be organized and displayed in ways that facilitatestudent handling of the books as a further encouragement to reading a wide variety of texts.


Although reading appears to have great personal importance for grade 4 students, a highpercentage reported having limited or no occasion to participate in shared and extended readingactivities. Of particular concern is the finding that the majority of students rarely or never

7 8


60

have oral reading experiences at home. According to the survey data, just over a tenth of thestudents read a story to an adult at home once a day (over two-fifths never or almost never doso) and just over a tenth have a story read to them by an adult at home on a daily basis (almostthree-fifths never or almost never have this experience). Regardless of how students defined"story," the results are of concern in that they suggest oral reading may not be encouragedenough. Oral reading (reading to others and being read to) not only instills the value of reading,but also helps students develop fluency, vocabulary and syntax, bridge to more difficult text,acquire general knowledge, establish relationships, observe modelling, and develop long-termhabits that encourage reading.

Despite the curriculum emphasis on cooperative and collaborative learning experiences, groupwork and discussion, a high percentage of students appear to have insufficient opportunities toparticipate in teacher-initiated shared and extended reading activities in the English LanguageArts classroom. Approximately half or more of the students reported having infrequent or nooccasion to: talk about or share what they have read with friends at school; work in pairs orsmall groups for reading activities; and write in a journal about something they have read. It ispossible that these reading experiences occur with greater frequency than reported, given thatvarying interpretations of terms such as "reading activities" and "journal" may have been afactor in the responses (for example, students might have given different responses if these termshad been replaced by references to "learning/reading centres," "writing portfolios," and soon). Nevertheless, the data point to a need for a greater emphasis on shared and extendedreading experiences.

Use of Reading Strategies

There is also evidence of insufficient teacher-facilitated use of specific pre- and post-readingstrategies. According to the survey data, over three-fifths of the teachers infrequently or neverhelp prepare students for reading a story by asking them to talk about it prior to reading, andclose to three-quarters infrequently or never help students understand a story with the use ofwebs/story maps following a reading. Depending on the language used in their particularclassrooms, students may have had varying definitions of terms such as "webs" and "storymaps," a consideration which needs to be taken into account when interpreting the results.


7')

61



Participants in the grade 4 Teacher Survey reported a median of nine years of teachingexperience in total and a median of five years of experience teaching Early Years EnglishLanguage Arts. This information suggests that some teachers currently teaching grade 4 EnglishLanguage Arts have spent time teaching at other levels, in other curriculum areas and/or in otherprograms.

An uncharacteristically high percentage of teachers did not respond to the item inquiring aboutthe amount of academic training acquired in the teaching of English Language Arts and theteaching of reading. Those who did respond, reported very little recent academic training inthese two areas. Teacher participation in professional development in reading/English LanguageArts also appears to be low, with a median of ten hours being reported for the past five years.(The questionnaire did not ask how much academic training or professional development inreading/language arts teachers had received in the French language.) Ideally, teachers shouldspend more time on professional development in reading/English Language Arts, but this maynot be practical given the multiple areas of responsibility of grade 4 teachers.

Virtually all teachers responded to the opportunity to rate their need for professionaldevelopment in seven different areas. Whereas a large majority registered some or great needfor professional development on topics relating to the practical application of the curriculum(evaluation techniques for reading, strategies for specific types of text and reading processes,teaching approaches, and available reading materials), a smaller majority saw a need forprofessional development relating to the more theoretical aspects of English Language Arts(basic reading theory, use of the grade 4 curriculum documents, and general philosophy of thecurriculum).

Close to three-quarters of the teachers noted that their schools make professional readingmaterials available weekly or monthly; however, only a little over two-fifths indicated thatadministrators make weekly or monthly efforts to promote and encourage the reading ofprofessional literature about reading/language arts. Only a slight majority of teachers reportedreading such literature weekly or monthly. These findings are of serious concern, particularlysince language is the foundation of an integrated program of instruction at the Early Years. Aseducational leaders, administrators not only need to keep up with current literature aboutreading/language arts, but they also need to encourage the reading and discussion of suchliterature among teachers.

. 0Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

62

Given that teachers appear to have limited recent academic training and professional developmentin reading/English Language Arts and receive inadequate support from administration to enhancetheir knowledge in this area, it is perhaps not surprising that a substantial number of teachers(between a quarter and half of the respondents) reported having only a partial understanding ofeach of the nine major areas of reading instruction listed in the survey (in addition, over a tenthreported a lack of understanding of five of those areas). It is noteworthy that the majority ofteachers reported a partial understanding or lack of understanding of areas such as readerresponse, developmental reading, and reading cuing systems, yet few teachers saw a great needfor professional development on basic reading theory which could provide knowledge in theseareas. Varying interpretations of the terminology may account for some apparent inconsistenciessuch as these. In any case, a higher level of knowledge of reading instruction would bedesirable.

Despite reporting limited involvement in academic and professional development activity in thefive years preceding the survey, a large majority of teachers observed changes in their teachingpractice during that time, with over half attributing these changes to the influence of professionaldevelopment sessions/activities and their own professional reading/study. Thus, teachers gavethe most credit to factors which did not figure prominently in their reported activities.

Half the teachers also credited the influence of colleagues' suggestions as a key factor inimplementing change. This finding supports educational research which emphasizes theimportance of the role of collegiality in promoting and shaping changes in teaching practices.One of the implications of this finding is that educational leaders may need to direct the focusof professional development activity towards long-term initiatives which facilitate teachers'collegial work.

Lps than a fifth of the teachers identified curriculum guides as a significant influence in shapingchange. This observation raises the question of whether there is a correlation between the lackof importance/use of the curriculum guides in implementing change and the reduction inconsultative services from Manitoba Education and Training. It may also point to the need fora comprehensive review of the construction of curriculum documents.

Taking into account their university education, professional development and past experience,virtually all survey participants rated themselves either as qualified or highly qualified to teachgrade 4 English Language Arts. Considering that teachers reported little recent academic trainingor professional development activity, including little professional reading, in the area ofreading/English Language Arts, it would appear that their qualification ratings were made largelyon the basis of experience.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program S1

63

School Organization

The teachers' reports on the time allotted to each grade 4 English Language Arts class they teachfalls somewhat short of the time allotments recommended by Manitoba Education and Training.

In general, the teachers' ratings regarding the extent of their influence over decisions concerningthe teaching of grade 4 English Language Arts suggest that teachers feel they have considerableinfluence over some practical aspects of teaching (for which they also saw the greatest need forprofessional development). Approximately four-fifths of the teachers reported having greatinfluence over choice of learning strategies to teach and choice of teaching methods/strategies.The extent of influence reported for these areas is encouraging if the methods/strategies chosenare consistent with the philosophical framework of an integrated, student-centered activity-basedapproach to language development. Surprisingly, the percentage of teachers who reported havinggreat influence over choice of evaluation methods/instruments was lower than the percentagereporting great influence over choice of teaching and learning strategies. Surely teachers oughtto have equal influence in each of these areas given that both instruction and evaluation areintegral parts of the teaching/learning process.

A major concern surfacing from the influence ratings is that only a fifth of the teachers feel theyhave great influence over the selection of materials added to the school library and just over 2quarter feel they have great influence over the amount and kind of professional developmentavailable to them. These two kinds of teaching resources are esse 'tial to the development ofeffective teaching practices at any time, but particularly at a time when major shifts incurriculum/educational emphases are taking place. It is imperative that teachers have greaterinfluence in choosing library materials, especially since Manitoba schools are increasinglymoving towards resource-based learning.

As well as reporting limited influence over decisions related to teaching resources, teachersreported limited availability of various types of support services in their respective schools. Asubstantial proportion of teachers (from about one-quarter to three-fifths) indicated that five ofthe eight services listed are "not available" in their schools. It is not clear how teachersinterpreted the response option "not available." This option could have been interpreted in anumber of different ways: not offered in the school; not accessible even if personnel areostensibly available; not necessary/applicable (as determined by school size, local clienteleneeds, policy decisions and/or philosophy). For example, since Early Years teachers rarely workexclusively in one subject area, it is not surprising that over three-fifths of the teachers reportedthe unavailability of department head or team leaders. Regardless of whether the support servicesexist, a high percentage of teachers feel they do not have access to them. Local jurisdictionsshould apply the survey data to their particular situations.

F-N 2


64

The Curriculum

According to the survey data, the majority of teachers make infrequent or no use of thecurriculum documents that apply to grade 4 English Language Arts, English Language Arts:Overview K-12 (1988), English Language Arts: Early Years (1982), and Curriculum Guide:Grades 1-2-3-4: FL2 (1985). What is particularly disturbing to find is that almost two-fifthsnever use the Overview, which outlines the foundational goals and objectives of the curriculum.As teachers carry the responsibility of implementing the curriculum goals and objectives, theyclearly need to be more conscious of the relevance of the appropriate documents.

When given an opportunity to rate the need for revision of the three curriculum documents,approximately two-fifths, one-third and one-half of the teachers respectively noted satisfactionwith the Overview the Early Years guide and the Grades 1-2-3-4 guide (while the rest eitherexpressed dissatisfaction or did not respond). The survey data reflecting limited use of andlimited satisfaction with the curriculum guides may be an indication that it is time to considera review of the Fatly Years English Language Arts curriculum documents.

There appear to be some contradictions in the survey data regarding teacher use and knowledgeof the curriculum documents. Although few teachers reported making frequent use of the EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum documents and few attributed changes in their teaching practices tothe influence of curriculum guides, virtually all teachers felt they had adequate or highlyadequate knowledge of the documents, as well as an adequate or highly adequate understandingof what grade 4 students should be doing in English Language Arts and of the teaching strategiesappropriate for students at this level.

Teaching Materials

The teachers' estimations of the frequency with which they use various teaching materials in thegrade 4 reading/English Language Arts program suggest both positive and negative practices.A highly commendable finding is the apparent use of a wide variety of materials in the program.Clearly this supports the integrated approach to language development. It appears that teachersuse reference materials and content area materials with the greatest frequency. The observationthat a substantial majority of teachers make weekly or monthly use of student-authored materialsand computers is encouraging. However, the finding that only a little over half the teachers makeweekly or monthly use of videotapes/films and audiotapes is of concern in that it suggestsinadequate accommodation of various forms of reading or styles of learning. Also of concernis the data pointing to the limited use of trade literature. (It is possible that teachers had differentinterpretations of the terminology categorizing the various materials.) In any case, teachers arenot using any one type of material exclusively.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program S 3

65

Close to three-quarters of the survey respondents noted that they are able to purchase materialsnot on the authorized Manitoba Text Book Bureau catalogue list, yet less than a fifth indicatedtheir school has a review process for evaluating these materials. Furthermore, two-fifths of theteachers reported having only fair or poor access to information about new materials. Theapparent absence of a review process in most schools and the somewhat limited access toinformation about new materials suggests that teachers may need to acquire additional resourcesfor reviewing materials and/or become better informed of the resources that are available (suchas the documents, Selecting of Learning Resources: Policies and Procedures for ManitobaSchools (1990) and School Library Policy Statement (1991) produced by Manitoba Education andTraining). To encourage and assist teachers in continuing to choose appropriate teachingmaterials, the Department may need to make more widely known its criteria/process forevaluating and selecting materials (to ensure gender balance, representation of minority groups,and so on).

Teaching Practices

Some encouraging trends are evident in the data regarding the use of teaching strategies in thegrade 4 reading/English Language Arts program. Teachers appear to be using a variety of bothteacher-centered and student-centered activities in the classroom. It is encouraging to note thatnearly all teachers frequently read aloud to the class and that mini-lessons to the class occur withmuch greater frequency than lectures to the whole class.

The results also warrant some concern. Although teachers reported using a variety ofstudent-centered strategies, they still appear to favour teacher-directed activities. According tothe survey responses, a high percentage of teachers infrequently or never use student-centeredstrategies such as reader response logs/journals, reading conferences, cross-age reading, andreaders theatre. Given that a student-centered program is fundamental to the curriculum, teachersneed to continue exploring and initiating a more diverse range of student-centere activities,particularly interactive learning experiences. Teachers could incorporate a wide range ofactivities (such as working in pairs, literature circles) in addition to those listed in thequestionnaire.

The teachers' importance ratings of various dimensions of the reading program also give causefor concern. For example, close to a third of the teachers did not ascribe great importance to"differentiated learning experiences" (which honour the personal learning style of each child)and a quarter did not ascribe great importance to "collaborative learning experiences" (whichpromote the development of inferential and critical-reflective thinking skills). Furthermore,"student understanding and use of specific strategies for reading different types of materials"and "student understanding of the three major cuing systems in reading" were rated as onlysomewhat important by approximately a quarter of the respondents. Considering that theseaspects of reading are crucial to the development of metacognition, more teachers should regardthem as very important. It is possible that a significant percentage of teachers do not place high

F%. 4Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

66

value on student understanding and use of reading strategies and cuing systems because theteachers have insufficient knowledge in these areas, as suggested in their self-rated knowledgeof reading instruction.

Evaluation

Some encouraging trends are reflected in the teachers' responses to the survey items addressingthe evaluation of reading. Just as teachers appear to be using a variety of teaching materials andteaching strategies in the reading/English Language Arts program, so they appear to value theuse of a variety of evaluation products and processes for evaluating reading. According to thesurvey data, formative evaluation appears to be gaining in importance.

The degree of importance ascribed to several forms of evaluation leaves room for concern,however. The data showing that more than half of the teachers credit standardized tests withsome or great importance may be an indication that such tests are mandated by school divisionseven at the Early Years level. Such a practice is incongruent with the Early Years curriculumand with current evaluation theory which emphasize the importance of authentic evaluation.

A significant proportion of teachers (from approximately one-quarter to one-half) gave a"somewhat important" rating to such evaluation products and processes as reading/writingportfolios, reading response journals or logs, hulk reading lists and experiences, observation,self-evaluation, and strategy evaluation. If these are viewed as only somewhat important, theymay be in danger of disappearing from the teaching repertoire. Teachers need to be givenappropriate opportunities and support to develop their understanding of the importance and useof these products and processes for evaluating reading if they are to remain part of curriculumimplementation. According to the survey results, nearly all teachers feel a need for professionaldevelopment on the topic of "evaluation techniques for reading."

While teachers deserve commendation for using various forms of evaluation, they also needencouragement to explore a variety of evaluation strategies in addition to those identified in thesurvey. In the interest of accommodating and assessing various learning styles, representationalsystems and multiple intelligences, teachers need to promote not only written responses, but alsoother modes of expression.


67

SUMMARY OF GRADE 4 READING ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Student Test Findings

Overall, students appear to be more proficient at tasks requiring literal and interpretivecomprehension than they are at tasks demanding critical-reflective comprehension. Thisobservation raises a question about whether more of the instructional time spent on developingliteral and interpretive comprehension skills should be spent on developing critical-reflectivecomprehension skills, and whether students are involved in appropriate activities through whichto explore critical-reflective reading tasks. The students' performance may be an indication thatthey have insufficient opportunities to engage in co-operative and collaborative reading activitieswhich are conducive to learning and applying critical-reflective thinking strategies/processes.

The grade 4 test results reflect a high level of proficiency in students' ability to understandexplicitly stated meaning of a variety of reading materials. Many students, however, haddifficulty responding to several items involving highly complex processing of explicitly statedinformation in expository materials such as maps and schedules. Furthermore, the highpercentage of partial responses to the item asking students to produce a drawing to communicatetheir literal comprehension of the poetry selection may reflect a lack of experience in expressingreading comprehension in a mode other than writing. It may also indicate that students are notused to having this mode of expression assessed formally. Although students were expected toconvey their literal comprehension of the given poem, some of the drawings actuallydemonstrated interpretive comprehension.

The mean performance on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest demonstrates that a substantialmajority of students are skilled in inferring meaning from various types of text. The apparentachievement of the interpretive comprehension objectives by such a high percentage of studentssuggests that grade 4 students are being exposed to an appropriate variety and range of readingmaterials through which to develop their ability to infer meaning. The findings further suggestthat a large proportion of students are being provided with opportunities to explore and offerinterpretive responses through appropriate interactive experiences.

There is also evidence of students' ability to explore and evaluate the implications of a varietyof texts; however, students appear to have considerable difficulty responding in written form tosome open-ended questions requiring a critical-reflective consideration of reading material. Theresults do not demonstrate conclusively whether students are experiencing limitations in theircritical-reflective thinking or struggling with the expression of their thinking in the form ofwritten responses. Teachers will need to determine the nature of their students' difficulties.


68

Student performance on the Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest is perhaps also anindication that students at this stage may require prior discussion and explanation of complexreading tasks in a written test situation. In any case, teachers need to recognize the limitationsof expressing reading comprehension in written form and the need to provide students withencouragement and opportunities to use various expressive modes in developing andcommunicating reading comprehension.

Although the data resulting from the assessment of students' reading strategies and process skillsare inconclusive, they suggest that students have inadequate skills and/or experience in observingand articulating their use of reading strategies at a conscious level. This finding draws attentionto the importance of teaching students to recognize reading strategies and promoting experiencesthat allow students to practice, reflect on and articulate the use of the full range of readingstrategies. In order to gain a more comprehensive and representative understanding of studentabilities in this area, however, other innovative ways of exploring and assessing readingstrategies and processes will need to be developed.

Implications of Survey Findings for Test Results

The teacher survey and the student reading survey were included in the 1992 ReadingAssessment to give both teachers and students an opportunity to express their views on theimportance and implementation of various aspects of reading in the English Language Artsprogram. In many respects, the teachers' reports of classroom practices may well be moreinformed and realistic than the students' accounts. Nevertheless, what students perceive to behappening merits serious consideration. Ultimately, both the teachers' and students' responses,and the apparent inconsistencies between them, must be viewed in the light of students'performance on the Reading Assessment and the English Language Arts curriculum guidelines.

According to the survey results, teachers are implementing the curriculum objective of exploringa wide variety of reading materials. The teachers' estimations of how often they used variousmaterials in the 1991-92 school year reveal that expository texts (content area materials andreference materials) are the most commonly used materials in the grade 4 reading/EnglishLanguage Arts program. Given that students had considerable difficulty with certain types ofexpository materials, teachers may need to assess whether they are using an appropriate rangeof expository texts and/or whether they are teaching the appropriate strategies for reading certaintypes of exposition.

Teachers also appear to be incorporating a variety of student-centered classroom activities whichshould lead to stronger inferential and critical-reflective comprehension skills. Nearly all teachersreported making daily or weekly use of activities such as Uninterrupted Sustained Silent Readingand small-group work for discussion, sharing and assignment completion. A significantpercentage, however, indicated they infrequently or never use other types of student-centeredactivities such as reader response logs/journals, bulk reading, reading conferences, cross-age


87

69

reading and readers theatre. The reading survey results show that approximately half the studentsperceive themselves to have limited or no occasion to participate in shared reading activities suchas talking about or sharing what they have read with friends at school and working in pairs orsmall groups for reading activities, and over two-thirds feel they have limited or no occasion toextend their reading experience by writing in a journal about something they have read. Itappears that teachers need to continue exploring and promoting a more diverse range ofstudent-centered activities, particularly interactive learning experiences.

The test results pointing to students' need for more guidance and experience in recognizing andusing pre-reading activities and strategies may also have some support in the survey findings.In the teacher survey, more than four-fifths of the teachers ascribed great importance to"pre-reading activities and setting purpose for reading;" however, according to the students'perceptions, only a little over a third of the teachers make daily or weekly efforts to help preparestudents for reading by asking them to talk about a story before they read it.

It may be argued that students do not necessarily understand the reading activities and strategieswell enough to report on their use. Regardless of whether the student survey responses are anaccurate reflection of classroom practice, the responses convey what students perceive to behappening. If the students' perceptions of reading practices do not correspond with the actualpractices, teachers may need to concentrate on raising the use of reading experiences and readingstrategies to a conscious level.

411 Just as the test results show students have inadequate conscious awareness of strategies used inthe reading process, so the survey results suggest a significant proportion of teachers haveinsufficient knowledge of and place insufficient emphasis on the teaching and evaluation ofstrategies for different types of text and reading processes. Nearly all teachers registered someor great need for professional development in this area. Educational leaders have a responsibilityto respond to the teachers' need for support in providing students with learning experiences thatwill enable them to strengthen their reading comprehension skills.

S8Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

70

RECOMMENDATIONS (Grade 4)

Careful analysis of the grade 4 Reading Assessment results has led to the followingrecommendations related to curriculum and professional development. These recommendationsare expected to form the basis for provincial and divisional action plans designed to improvereading instruction in Early Years.

It is hoped that all English Language Arts teachers will be involved in this process. Moreover,since the role of administrators as curriculum leaders is crucial to effecting change, curriculumleaders are expected to support teachers in the implementation of the recommendations whichfollow. The group or groups targeted by each recommendation is/are identified after eachrecommendation.

I. CURRICULUM

TS0

N

:x

LEGEND

TeachersSchoolsSchoolDivisionsManitobaEducation andTraining

F * Faculties of

A. Development Education

To ensure that curriculum documents are more useable byteachers, it is recommended that:

1. Manitoba Education and Training review existing anddeveloping curriculum documents in the light of educators'concerns about: time allotments/curriculum overload; EarlyYears/English Language Arts philosophy; and implementationapproaches. M

B. Implementation

1. Curriculum Materials

To ensure that educators access the relevant information incurriculum documents in planning instruction, it is recommendedthat:

a. teachers make regular use of current curriculumdocuments in planning, delivering and assessing dailyinstruction. T


71

T=

LEMND

ToodwsSchools

D = School.Divisions

2. student Reading MaterialsN Nao%itoba

Education andTraining

F * facul t es ofTo ensure the use of a wide variety of appropriate student readingmaterials, it is recommended that:

Education

a. teachers and curriculum leaders be actively involved inselecting and displaying a wide variety of readingmaterials for students; students' book handling beencouraged through appropriate display techniques;

b. Manitoba Education and Training remind teachers of itsselection criteria/process;

c. Manitoba Education and Training continue to involveeducators in the selection of reading materials for listingin the Manitoba Text Book Bureau catalogue;

d. school divisions write and implement their own materialsselection policies, with input from teachers, based on themodel provided by Manitoba Education and Training.

3. Instruction

To ensure continued improvement in students' readingachievements, especially in the higher level objectives of critical-reflective comprehension, it is recommended that:

a. teachers continue using a wide variety of strategies,activities and resources which allow for differentiatedstudent-centered instruction;

b. teachers provide a balance of pre-, during- andpost-reading strategies with a view to developingcognition and metacognition;

c. curriculum leaders support teachers' use of a wide varietyof strategies, activities and resources which allow fordifferentiated student-centered instruction;

T, S, D

M

M

T, S, D

T

T


72

1d. universities continue to ensure that the strategies and

practices which they promote are consistent with theprovincially mandated curriculum;

T = Teachers$ a SchoolsD a School

DivisionsM Manitoba


F v Faculties ofEducation

F

e. all educators encourage parents/adults to read regularlywith and to children. T, S, D, M, F

4. Evaluation and Assessment

Since curricula, instruction and evaluation must be interwoven, itis recommended that:

a. teachers provide opportunities for students to explore avariety of expressive modes (such as art, music, drama,etc.) to develop, practice and evaluate reading abilities;

b. curriculum leaders provide teachers with information andsupport in developing an understanding of a variety ofexpressive modes (such as art, music, drama, etc.) andtheir role in learning and assessing;

c. curriculum leaders provide teachers with opportunities todevelop an extensive repertoire of evaluation strategiesand resources consistent with differentiatedstudent-centered instruction.


T

S, D, M, F

S, D, M, F

II. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Because support for teachers is critical in implementing many of the aboverecommendations, it is recommended that:

a. teachers keep their approaches to reading/language artsinstruction current by accessing professional developmentopportunities, reading professional literature and collaboratingwith informed colleagues;

b. curriculum leaders be pro-active in providing professionaldevelopment opportunities, professional reading materials andsupport, and include teachers in professional developmentplanning and material selection;

c. universities make student teachers aware of currentprofessional literature and emphasize the importance ofcontinual updating throughout an educator's career.

73

LEGEND

T = Teachers$ = SchoolsD = School

DivisionsN = Manitoba


F a Facultiesof Education

T

S, D, M

F


GRADE 8


Shy PersonTakes thePlunge

Canadians onEverest

Diving Hero:

RISK-TAKING REVIEW

Risk suegests that there osomething to lose it the rot,that is taken is not successtui.In everyday living. there aremany risks that most at ustake for granted and do notthink about seriously. Forexample. every time we ridea bike we take a risk that we

mieht iniurecI in an

i:ident. We usually think4 risk-takers as people who.ire daredevils and participatein "scary sports. nut risksmay also include such thingsJh exposing iurseives toembarrassment or ridicule.

The first selection you will read is a narrative (story) titledWm: Do I Do Now! written by Ellen Conford. Read theselection thinking about the risks the people in the scop aretaking. When you have finished, answer the questionsfollowing the story and then move on to the next selection.While you read. wu will notice cith a number beside it.These will show sou where to find information whenanswering come of the questions.

Reading Final Report. French Immersion Schools

75

CHAPTER 5


INTRODUCTION




The specified reading objectives were assessed in relation to the following four types of text:

Narration: Ellen Conford, "What Do I Do Now?" (short story)Poetry: Al Pittman, "Cooks Brook"Exposition: Excerpts from Ralph Keyes, Chancing It: Why We Take Risks, and

Bruce Patterson, Canadians on EverestTable: "Survey Results for Possible Eating Disorders"

These reading selections, all addressing the theme of risk-taking, were reproduced in Risk-TakingReview, a journal issue produced specifically for assessment participants. Each of the selectionswas accompanied by brief introductory comments intended to help students focus their thoughtson the various aspects of the theme.


In the Risk-Taking Question Booklet the test items were grouped according to the specific textto which they were directed rather than the objectives being assessed. However, the test resultsreported below are presented by subtest, followed by reading survey data. The number presentedmay not always total 100% because of rounding-off or because the non-response rate is notreported. A frequency distribution of responses to each assessment item was provided in thePreliminary Report.

4


76


ITEMS: Multiplchoice: 1-9

In addition to being given introductory notes prior to each reading selection, students werepresented with se. of nine introductory multiple-choice items, which were read aloud and pacedby the teachers. The purpose of these items was to activate the readers' prior knowledge andassess their preparedness for understanding various aspects of the topic of risk- taking.

What is significant in the results for this section is the high rate of response: 98.8% or more ofthe students replied to each of the nine focusing statements. This indicates that most studentswere engaged in thinking about the topic of risk-taking at the start of the assessment, which wasthe intent of this section.

MEANING VOCABULARY





Of the six multiple-choice items comprising the Meaning Vocabulary subtest, four related to thenarrative, one to the expository text and one to the poetry. All the items directed students to aspecific page in the Risk-Taking Review. An icon ( 'f) was placed in the margins of the readingmaterial to help students locate the relevant context and alert them to a particular vocabularyitem being assessed.

Understanding of the various words, expressions and phrases selected for the assessment wasdependent on the students' ability to recall vocabulary meaning, or to gain literal meaning ormetaphoric significance from the context in which the vocabulary was used. Four of the sixvocabulary items were explicitly defined in the text. The meaning of the other two words wasimplied in the text.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program d 5

II

77

RESULTS

Table 33 below shows the mean performance c.h. the Meaning Vocabulary subtest to be 82.57%.The percentage of correct responses for the six Meaning Vocabulary items ranged from 64.9%to 96.1 %(see Table 34 below). The majority of students understood each of the selectedvocabulary items in context.

TABLE 33



MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score


TABLE 34

MEANING VOCABULARYMULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS


ItemType of

Text Word/Phrase Meaning

Percentageof Student

Responses Correct

16 Narration ingenious Implicit 76.0%17 Narration take the plunge Explicit 96.118 Narration mudslinging Explicit 78.719 Narration introverted Explicit 93.029 Exposition recreational neck riskers Explicit 86.737 Poetry buoyant Implicit 64.9

More than three-quarters of the respondents correctly identified the meaning of the three phrasesor expressions "take the plunge" (item 17), "recreational neck riskers" (item 29), and"mudslinging" (item 18). In each case, the expression itself offered a literal or metaphoric clueto the concept it was meant to describe. Nearly all students successfully recalled or understoodthe meaning of the word "introverted" (item 19), for which a definition was supplied directlyfollowing the use of the term.


78

The words presenting difficulty for the greatest proportion of students were "ingenious" (item16correctly defined by just over three-quarters of the students) and "buoyant"(item37correctly defined by almost two-thirds). In both instances, the text provided no direct orparaphrased definition of these words. If students were unable to recall the meaning of thesewords, they were required to arrive at the correct definition through an understanding of theideas and images within the text.

Interpretation

The Meaning Vocabulary subtest results demonstrate that the vast majority of students have theability to understand words whose meaning, whether literal or metaphoric, is explicitly statedin the text. Many students, however, appear to have difficulty with vocabulary whose meaninghas to be inferred from implicit contextual clues.


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 11, 12, 13, 24, 25, 26, 31, 56, 57, 58Open-ended: E



Eleven items assessing students' literal comprehension skills were included in the grade 8Reading Assessment, three relating to the narrative, five to the expository text, and three to thetable. The information needed to respond to the Literal Comprehension items was provideddirectly within the text. Students were required to demonstrate the ability to read and retainand/or locate the necessary information/explanations within the text. With the exception of oneopen-ended item, all the items on this subtest were presented in the multiple-choice format.Students' responses to the open-ended item were matched against the responses outlined in theScoring Key.

RESULTS

As shown in Table 35 below, the mean performance on the Literal Comprehension subtest was80.33%, which takes into account the results for the ten multiple-choice items and the oneopen-ended item reported in Table 36. The percentage of correct responses to the multiple-choiceitems ranged from 76.3% to 93.9%.


9r7

TABLE 35



MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

LITERAL COMPREHENSION 11 8.84 80.33% 1 1.59 A

TABLE 36

LITERAL COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE AND OPEN-ENDED ITEMS




Correct

11

12

13

24252631

565758

NarrationNarrationNarrationExpositionExpositionExpositionExpositionTableTableTable

92.0%89.691.076.382.891.080.987.293.991.8

OPEN-ENDED ITEM



E Exposition 5.6% 3.1% 73.1% 18.2%

79


80

An exceptionally high level of accomplishment was shown in student responses to themultiple-choice items on the Literal Comprehension subtest, particularly those relating to thetable and the short story. Each of the three items applying to the table depicting "Survey Resultsfor Possible Eating Disorders" required a literal reading of columns of statistical information(items 56, 57, 58). Almost nine-tenths of the students demonstrated the ability to locate/identifythe applicable statistical data using the explanations provided in the accompanying key. Theprimary challenge in replying to the three items concerning the narrative, which consisted of anexchange of correspondence between a student and an advice columnist, was to follow thesequence of narrated events, a challenge met successfully by approximately nine-tenths of thestudents (items 11, 12, 13).

The results for the four multiple-choice items concerning the expository texts (consisting ofexcerpts from books on skydiving and mountain climbing reproduced in the Risk-Taking Review)also indicate strong literal comprehension skills on the part of a large majority of students. Inthe instructions preceding these items, students were referred to specific sections of textcontaining the relevant information or explanations. Just over three-quarters of the students chosethe correct response for one of these items (item 24) and over four-fifths selected the correctresponse for each of the remaining items (items 25, 26, 31). A possible explanation for theslightly lower results for item 24 is that the vocabulary used in the question was not synonymouswith that used in the relevant section of the text.

In contrast, nearly all students either provided a wrong response or offered no response to theone open-ended item included on this subtest (item E). This item asked students to state threemethods used by the author to draw the conclusion that most thrill-sport participants do not havea "death wish." Students were credited with a complete response if they specified all threestated methods, a partial response if they gave two of the three possible answers, and a wrongresponse if they identified only one or no correct method. Since the terms used in the question(e.g., "methods," "conclusions") were not synonymous with the context in which the methodsare stated, students may have had difficulty interpreting the question, in addition to havingdifficulty finding and extracting the information embedded within a lengthy paragraph. In anycase, this item required a sophisticated level of literal comprehension.

Interpretation

Students performed remarkably well on nearly all the items included on the LiteralComprehension subtest, particularly on those items requiring a literal reading of the short storyand the table. Overall, the results for the expository reading selections were lower than for theother types of text.


81

More than three-quarters of the students selected correct responses for each of the tenmultiple-choice items; however, nearly three-quarters provided wrong responses for the one itemrequiring an open-ended response and close to a fifth offered no response. A partial explanationfor the weak performance on the open-ended item may be that students had difficulty with thewording or structure of the question, which also may have been a factor in the comparativelylow score for one of the multiple-choice items (item 24). In any case, the open-ended responsessuggest that students did not employ appropriate strategies to construct meaning from theexpository text.


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 10, 14, 27, 28, 30, 36, 59, 60Open-ended: B, F(i), I(i &ii)



Unlike the Literal Comprehension subtest which inquired about details stated directly within thetext, the Interpretive Comprehension subtest focused on meaning suggested or implied in thereading selections. The eleven questions designed to assess readers' interpretive comprehensionwere presented in the two standard formats (with eight multiple-choice and three open-endeditems), and applied to all four genres (three to the narration, four to the exposition, two to thepoetry, and two to the table). Open-ended responses were matched against the responses outlinedin the Scoring Key.

RESULTS

The mean performance on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest, including the eightmultiple-choice and three open-ended items, was 64.49% (see Table 37 below).

Reading Final Report, French hrunersion Program

82

TABLE 37



MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviationRaw Score

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONMultiple-ChoiceOpen-Ended (Rubric)

TOTAL

8

3

11

5.231.86

7.09

65.41%62.07

64.49

1.670.79

2.16


As shown in Table 38 below, the percentage of correct responses to the eight multiple-choiceitems ranged from 42.1% to 96.1%. Student performance fluctuated considerably from item toitem, even within the various genres.

TABLE 38

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS


Item Type of TextPercentage of

Student Responses Correct

10 Narration 96.1%14 Narration 47.927 Exposition 68.828 Exposition 70.230 Exposition 82.336 Poetry 44.859 Table 70.960 Table 42.1

Each of the two multiple-choice items relating to the narrative text (consisting of a series ofletters presented in an advice column format) dealt with the motivation informing a character'saction or decision. Virtually all students were successful in accounting for the initiation of thecorrespondence, which was alluded to in various ways in the first letter (item 10). In contrast,under half the students responded correctly to the item asking for an explanation of why a tutor


1 u

83

411)

agrees to instruct two individuals simultaneously (item 14). In responding to this question,students were expected to eliminate explicitly stated ostensible reasons in favour of the actualunderlying reason conveyed through a description of more subtle actions, such as facialexpression. Fewer than half the students chose the correct implicitly stated reason, while morethan a quarter (27.1%) chose the most literal response.

A similar process was expected for the multiple-choice item regarding the poem, "CooksBrook" (item 36). Students were asked to distinguish the greatest of several fears the diver inthe poem associates with diving from the top ledge of a cliff into a brook containing adangerously projecting shelf of rock. Less than half the students correctly identified the primary,implied social risk of failure or humiliation in backing down from the challenge of diving;approximately two-fifths (40.7%) chose the more obvious, but secondary, physical danger.

On average, approximately three-quarters of the students responded correctly to the threemultiple-choice items concerning the expository texts addressing various aspects of the topic ofrisk-taking. With respect to these three items, students were asked to: identify the likelyderivation of the name, "low-pull contests," the meaning of which is implied in the term itselfwhen used in the context of describing the sport (item 27); infer, from a specified list ofsignificant attractions, the single greatest appeal for thrill seekers (item 28); and give a synopsisor summary statement of the obvious rewards of testing the limits suggested in a given text (item30).

Two of the multiple-choice items applied to the table, "Survey Results for Possible EatingDisorders." Here, students were expected to isolate the figures substantiating or best supportingthe survey findings suggested in the questions, a task met with unequal success: close tothree-quarters of the students successfully identified the age group in which males have a higherpercentage of eating disorders than females (item 59); and just over two-fifths identified the setof statistics providing the best proof that urban students are at greater risk of eating disordersthan rural students (item 60). The latter item required students to assess the relevance of severalsets of data.

Open-Ended Items

On average, nearly half the responses to the three open-ended items were scored as completeresponses (47.6%), over a quarter were considered partial responses (28.9%), and under a fifth(16.9%) were judged to be wrong responses on the basis of the scoring rubric provided (seeTable 39 below).


1 (12

84

TABLE 39

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONOPEN-ENDED ITEMS


Percentage of Student Responses Correct

Item Type of Text Complete Partial WrongI

NR

B Narration 22.5% 63.2% 9.7% 4.6%F(i) Exposition 72.9 12.1 11.6 3.4

I(i & ii) Poetry 47.5 11.4 29.5 11.6

Two of the open-ended items on this subtest anticipated observations based not only on thetextual information provided, but also on prior knowledge and/or experience. Students performedexceptionally well on the item requiring a written explanation of what the author of one of theexpository texts considers to be the reason teenagers take "big risks": nearly three-quarters ofthe students provided complete responses and just over a tenth offered partial responses (itemF[i]). The one open-ended question applying to the narrative text asked students to explain howthe main character demonstrates self-confidence in relating to a tutor. This task required anunderstanding of assertive actions contradicting the character's repeatedly stated self-concept asan "introverted" and "extremely shy person." To obtain a partial response students wereexpected to note that the character makes a request to the tutor, whereas to rate a completeresponse they were expected to observe that the character not only makes a request, but alsogives direction and shows persistence. While less than a quarter of the students gave completeresponses, almost two-thirds were able to provide partial responses (item B).

The poetry-related task (item I[i &ii]), which required students to infer an image of the diverbased on the images used to describe the diver's entry into the water, received a complete orpartial response from almost three-fifths of the students. Close to a third gave a wrong response,and just over a tenth offered no response.

Interpretation

Responses to several of the items on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest suggest that halfor more of the students have an inadequate understanding of the thinking strategy adjustmentneeded (or lack the cognitive skills required) to differentiate implicitly stated textual informationfrom explicitly stated information (items 14, 36) and to sort relevant from irrelevant data (item60). The more subtle the information, the more difficulty students had giving correct responses.A large proportion of students chose responses demonstrating a literal reading of the text wherean inferential or interpretive reading was required.


I03

S

85

Judging by the relatively weak performance on both the poetry-related items on this subtest(items 36, students experienced a great deal of difficulty interpreting the complex poetryselection independently. Furthermore, the results for the items relating to the table indicate thatstudents had considerable difficulty manipulating and interpreting statistical data (items 59, 60).


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 15Open-ended: A(i & ii), C, D, F(ii), G, H



This subtest challenged students to give critical-reflective thought to the assigned readingmaterials. The individual items on this subtest demanded an evaluation and interpretation of thetext as well as an exploration of its significance beyond the apparent or immediate meaning.Reliance on prior knowledge and experience was an important factor in the process of gainingcritical-reflective comprehension of the text.

Items examining readers' critical-reflective comprehension were applied to three types of textin the following proportion: four to the narration, two to the exposition, and one to the poetry.All but one of the seven items required an open-ended, as opposed to a multiple-choice,response. The open-ended responses were matched against the responses outlined in the ScoringKey.

RESULTS

As indicated in Table 40 below, the mean performance on the Critical-Reflective Comprehensionsubtest, consisting of one multiple-choice and six open-ended items, was 58.28%.


86

TABLE 40



MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSION 7 4.08 58.28% 1.37

The results for the individual items on this subtest are presented in Table 41 below. As notedin the table, the rate of "no response" ranged from 0.2% to 11.1%. On average, over a thirdof the open-ended responses were scored as complete responses (36.6%), over a third were ratedas partial responses (36.6%), and just over a fifth were scored wrong (21.5%).

TABLE 41

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE AND OPEN-ENDED ITEMS


MULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEM


Correct

15 I Narration 78.7%

OPEN-ENDED ITEMS



ACD

F(ii)GH

NarrationNarrationNarrationExpositionExpositionPoetry

52.3% 42.6%15.3 59.616.9 56.262.2 18.624.0 24.248.9 18.2

4.8%23.023.214.341.621.8

0.2%2.23.64.8

10.211.1

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program1(.15

I

S

87

The four narrative-related items encouraged students to examine and question the words andactions of the featured characters, observing various layers of meaning and significance. Nearlyfour-fifths of the students were successful in discerning the true motive behind the specifiedaction of two characters, disregarding the apparent motive initially implied but later dismissedby the characters themselves (item 15). Most students also gave complete or partial responsesto the question asking them to identify the fear underlying a character's reluctance to take a risk(item A). A small majority of students were partially successful in identifying the personalitycharacteristics reflected in the behaviour of two characters (item D), and in interpreting themessage(s) implied in the final advice given to the principal character (item C); less than a fifthprovided complete responses to these two items, and just under a quarter gave wrong responses.

For the poetry item (H) and for both the expository items (F[ll], G), students were expected toprovide critical-reflective assessments of specified textual statements, a process requiringstudents to draw extensively on prior knowledge regarding the theme of risk-taking.Approximately two-thirds of the students gave fully or partially satisfactory explanations of why,after a successful "risk," people commonly behave as though there were "nothing to it," theway the diver in the poem behaves following a risky dive (item H). Just over a fifth of thestudents responded incorrectly and just over a tenth did not attempt to give a response.

Four-fifths of the students gave complete or partial responses to the item calling for a statementof agreement or disagreement regarding an author's assessment of why teenagers take "bigrisks," with opinions to be supported with a reasonable, relevant defence (item F[ii]). Incontrast, just over hair' the students offered either wrong or no interpretive explanations of whatis meant by an author's assertion that 'Follow me Dad' are said to be the three most dangerouswords in skiing" (item G).

Interpretation

The mean performance on the Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest was lower than on anyof the other subtests. What is encouraging in the results for this subtest is that almostthree-quarters of the open-ended responses were rated as complete or partial responses.However, over a third of the responses ranked in the latter category, which indicates thatstudents are providing insufficient support for their arguments.

The items on this subtest relying most heavily on personal opinion and reflection on priorknowledge/experience had a lower response rate than those calling primarily for an assessmentof the assigned reading material. In formulating responses to these items, students were requiredto engage in the complex cognitive process of linking the reading material with their ownknowledge/experience of the real world and vice versa. Some students appear to need guidancein understanding and using this strategy.

t t


88


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 20, 21, 22, 23, 32, 33, 34, 35, 61


Recognizing the use of, and interaction between, the thinking andmetacognitive strategies involved in the reading process.

Adapting and varying the use of these strategies at a conscious levelaccording to the demands of the text and/or reading situation.

The assessment of reading strategies and process skills is a relatively new area of assessment inManitoba. Formally included for the first time in the 1992 Reading Assessment, this subtest wasintended to assess and extend student awareness and use/selection of various interactive strategiesinvolved in the reading process, as well as to reinforce student awareness of the need to examinereading strategies and process skills at a conscious level. In addition to being expected toobserve, monitor and evaluate their own reading process, students were required to give closeattention to the diverse techniques used in the assessment reading materials.

Since the specific strategies selected for assessment were chosen largely on the basis of thetextual materials included in the Reading Assessment, the list of reading strategies assessed wasneither comprehensive nor necessarily representative of the repertoire of strategies to whichstudents need to be, or are being, exposed. Consequently, the results for this subtest may notbe reflective of the full extent or range of students' abilities in the area. Given the innovativenature of this subtest, the results need to be interpreted with some caution.

All the items assessing students' reading strategies and process skills were presented in themultiple-choice format. Of the nine items included, one was applied to the table, and four each

to the narrative and expository texts.

RESULTS

Table 42 below shows the mean performance on the Reading Strategies and Process Skillssubtest to be 58.49%. The percentage of correct responses to the nine multiple-choice items on

this subtest ranged from 13.1% to 91.3% (see Table 43).

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 0'7

89

TABLE 42

READING STRATEGIES AND PROCESS SKILLS SUBTEST MEANSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)


MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent


READING STRATEGIES ANDPROCESS SKILLS 9 5.26 58.49% 1.44

TABLE 43

READING STRATEGIES AND PROCESS SKILLSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Item Type of TextPercentage of

Student Responses Correct

20 Narration 62.2 %21 Narration 53.822 Narration 91.323 Narration 85.532 Exposition 13.133 Exposition 30.534 Exposition 41.935 Exposition 70.261 Table 78.0

A number of items focused students' attention on their own reading strategies. Two itemsassessed their ability to select an appropriate reading strategy/approach for specific textualcontent and judge its effectiveness for the reading purpose/task. Whereas more than four-fifthsof the students were able to select an effective reading strategy for the narrative text (item 23),less than a third were able to do so for the expository text (item 33). When asked to identify agood strategy for reading the expository text, over half the students (53.5%) chose a strategysuitable for reading the narrative.

Iii


90

The item focusing on the table required students to establish a strategy for finding or interpretingstatistical data (item 61). Close to four-fifths of the students accurately indicated that the firstaction in attempting to find information from a statistical table is to "read the title of the tableand the symbol key at the bottom to get an idea of how the table is set up." According to theseresults, a large majority of students appear to understand that when reading a table, the title andsymbol key are the main organizational elements guiding interpretation of the information.

Students were also assessed on their ability to ask good questions of the text as a strategy forunderstanding the reading material. A little over two-fifths of the students correctly identifiedthe question, from a choice of four, that would best check their understanding of a specifiedexpository text (item 34). In another item, students were required to screen a list of fourstatements for subjectivity. Over two-thirds of the students were able to distinguish an opinionstatement from a list of factual observations (item 35).

For the remaining items, students were expected to assess the intent or effect of stylisticstrategies/techniques used by the authors of the narrative and selected expository texts. The itemreceiving correct responses from the highest percentage of respondents asked for an explanationof the author's purpose in varying the closing of the series of letters within the narrative (item22): just over nine-tenths of the students noted correctly that the purpose is to showdevelopments/changes in the main character's feelings. A correct response required a literalreading of the closing lines.

Students were also challenged to consider strategies used by the author of the narrative to conveythe attitudes, perceptions and personalities of fictional characters. A little over three-fifths of thestudents correctly observed that the author conveys the main character's sense of humour byhaving that character "use words and phrases in a humorous way," suggesting that thesestudents have an appreciation of the use/effect of tone (item 20). Another narrative-related itemanticipated recognition of a writer's methods of communicating the perspective or point of viewof a character who has no direct voice in the story (item 21). Slightly over half the studentsaccurately observed that it is more useful to look at accounts of direct encounters between thenarrator and a secondary character than it is to consider the descriptions of or speculations aboutthat character from the point of view of other characters.

The remaining item addressed the significance of presenting text in a particular style of type ortype-face (item 32). Surprisingly, little more than a tenth of the students correctly noted that thereason for the use of italicized words in a given expository text is to indicate to the reader that

91

Interpretation

Although the results for the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest varied significantlyfrom item to item, the overall performance was almost the same for the items testing studentson their own reading strategies as for the items assessing students' skill in reviewing thestrategies/techniques employed within the selected reading materials. There are strongindications, however, that students have much greater difficulty processing expository text thanthey do processing narrative text. In one item, for example, over half the students selected astrategy appropriate for narrative in dealing with expository text, which points to a confusionof reading strategies. The subtest results further suggest that the majority of students do notknow how to ask effective questions to monitor their comprehension of expository text.


ITEMS: 38-55, JN

The grade 8 Reading Survey sought to obtain information on students' attitudes toward reading,as well as on their reading habits. Students were instructed to base their answers on their readingin the English language. Sixty-nine multiple-selection items were included in the survey: foritems 38-55 students were expected to select the correct response from a choice of four possibleresponses; for items J, L, M and N, each of which contained from seven to fifteen sub-items,students were required to check one of three possible responses"often," "sometimes" or"never"; and for item K, respondents were asked to check all applicable sub-items from thechoice of twelve.

RESULTS

Students' Self-Assessment as Readers

At the start of the reading survey students were asked to evaluate their own reading competency(see Table 44 below). Nearly half the students rated themselves as good readers and overtwo-fifths judged themselves to be average readers. The percentage of students viewingthemselves as good readers was slightly lower than the proportion indicating that no aspect ofreading is difficult for them. While few students perceived themselves as having difficulty withthe vocabulary in reading, over a quarter claimed to have the greatest difficulty "reading fastenough to finish as quickly as classmates," and close to a fifth felt they had the most trouble"understanding the story or article."

Reading Final Report, French immersion Program

92

TABLE 44




Response

38.

39.

In my opinion, I am:

What do you find most difficult inreading?

a)b)c)d)

a)b)c)

d)

a good reader.an average reader.a poor reader.not sure what kind of reader I am.

Understanding the story or article.Reading the words.Reading fast enough to finish asquickly as classmates.No aspect of reading is difficult.

45.5%42.13.47.3

15.53.4

28.850.4

Reading Enjoyment

Survey results suggest a correspondence between reading competency and enjoyment of reading.For example, the proportion of students who professed to enjoy reading "often" (48.9%) and"sometimes" (47.4%) (item J[i]), corresponds closely with the proportion rating themselves"good" (45.5%) and "average" (42.1%) readers. Nearly all students claimed to find someenjoyment in reading. Most students also reported spending some time reading for pleasure outof school (item 42), the frequency ranging from daily or almost daily (39.5%), to two or threetimes a week (29.5%), once a week or less (19.6%), or never/almost never (9.7%).

Source of Reading Material

The survey reveals that the vast majority of grade 8 students own books (not including schoolbooks or comic books), with over half owning more than thirty books (57.1% of the studentsprofessed to own "more than thirty" books, 18.4% own "twenty-one to thirty," 15.3% own"eleven to twenty," and 6.8% own "ten or less,"item 40). As shown in Table 45 below,over three-quarters of the students spend their own money on reading materials, and overtwo-thirds trade or share reading materials with friends. Libraries, however, are the mostcommonly used resource for obtaining reading material. Library resources are used particularlyfor the purpose of looking up information for school, but also to find materials to read for funand to help with hobbies or personal interests. Although virtually all students borrow books fromtheir school or class library, the frequency with which they do so varies widely (25.2% borrowbooks "every few days," 42.1% do so "about once a month," 22.0% do so "a couple of timesa year," 8.5% "never or almost never" do soitem 43).


93

TABLE 45

SOURCE OF READING MATERIALFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Item L Resource

Frequency of Use

Often Sometimes Never NR

(i) Spend own money 22.3% 56.2% 19.9% 1.7%(vii) Trade/share with friends 23.0 47.0 27.6 2.4(iv) Use library-read for fun 31.7 46.5 20.1 1.7(v) Use library-information for school 48.9 43.6 5.3 2.2(vi) Use library-hobbies/interests 18.6 44.8 34.6 1.9

Types of Reading Material

The survey results suggest differences in student reading habits in and out of school. Studentswere asked to indicate, from a list of twelve kinds of text, the type of reading they do out ofschool (item K[i-xii]). Based on the percentage of respondents checking the individual texts asapplicable, students in grade 8 have the strongest inclination to read magazines outside of school.The twelve selected texts are listed in Table 46 below according to the reported frequency ofuse.

TABLE 46

TYPE OF MATERIAL STUDENTS READ OUT OF SCHOOLFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Item K Type of Reading MaterialPercentage of Students

Selecting Reading Material

(iv) Magazines 91.0%(ii) Fiction (e.g., novels, short stories, plays) 81.8(x) Advertisements, signs, and menus 71.9(v) Newspapers 71.7(i) Comics 70.7(viii) Schedules (e.g., bus, swimming pool, TV) 64.6(vii) Directions or instructions (e.g., how to build/improve...) 56.9(xii) Computer screen reading (e.g., games, tutor programs) 55.2(xi) Maps, charts and graphs 37.8(vi) Non-fiction (e.g., science articles, biographies) 33.9(ix) Forms (e.g., applications) 33.4(iii) Poetry 29.3

112


94

In another related item, students were requested to note the frequency with which they readspecific materials (item L[ii, iii, viii, ix]). More than four-fifths of the respondents noted they"often" or "sometimes" read the following: material related to a television show or a movie(85.7%); parts of the newspaper besides the comics or sports (81.6%); and news in a magazineor newspaper (92.5%). Furthermore, approximately nine-tenths (92.3%) indicated they "often"or "sometimes" read more than one book by the same author.

Some differences emerge when comparing the above results with student responses to the itemasking how often they read various types of text in school (item M[i-xv]). Based on thepercentage of respondents who reported reading the selected texts "often" or "sometimes,"in-school reading of the respective materials occurs in the order of frequency presented in Table47 below.

TABLE 47

TYPE OF MATERIAL STUDENTS READ IN SCHOOLFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Item M Type of Reading Material

Frequency of Reading

Often +Sometimes Often Sometimes Never

(i) Part of a novel, short story or story 96.6% 61.7% 34.9% 1.7%

(ii) Directions or instructions 91.0 52.3 38.7 6.5

(viii) Maps, charts, graphs 83.5 29.5 54.0 13.8

(iii) Poems 83.5 21.3 62.2 14.5

(iv) Schedules 82.6 45.8 36.8 15.5

(x) Computer screens (games, tutor programs) 81.4 32.2 49.2 16.5

(ix) Magazines 80.6 33.9 46.7 17.2

(vi) Advertisements 69.0 17.2 51.8 29.1

(xii) Science articles 66.1 18.6 47.5 32.0

(xiv) Sports materials 63.6 23.2 40.4 34.4

(v) Plays 63.1 7.7 55.4 34.4

(xi) Biographies 55.2 5.6 49.6 42.9(xv) Words to a song 54.2 13.8 40.4 43.8

(vii) Newspapers 52.6 10.7 41.9 45.3

(xiii) "How-to" books 32.7 4.1 28.6 64.9

By far the greatest percentage of students noted that they read the various texts "sometimes"(item MD-xi/D-25.2% "often," 45.2% "sometimes" and 27.5% "never"). The highpercentage of respondents choosing the category "sometimes" with respect to the various typesof texts suggests that students are reading a wide range of materials; they are not restricting theirreading to a few types of texts to the exclusion of others. These survey findings are an indicationthat the curriculum objective of balancing a wide variety of reading materials is being pursued


95

and/or achieved in many classrooms, even though a substantial percentage of students indicatedthat they "never" read the respective materials.

Most students reported having infrequent opportunities to choose what they will read in theirEnglish Language Arts class (item 49). Survey responses show that less than a fifth (16.5%) ofthe students are given a choice of reading material every class or almost every class,approximately a quarter (24.0%) have a choice once a week or more, a quarter (24.9%) havea choice at least once a month, and nearly a third (31.2%) are able to choose reading materialsonly a few times a year. Reading in the form of homework occurs with much greater frequency(item 45). Just over a third (34.6%) of the students read something for homework daily oralmost daily. The remaining students do homework-related reading two or three times a week(35.4%), once a week or less (22.0%), or never/almost never (6.1%).

Types of Reading Activities

Having teachers read literature aloud to the class appears to be a common experience for themajority of students (item 46). Over half (56.4%) the survey respondents reported that theirEnglish Language Arts teacher reads aloud to the class from once a week to every day (22.8%of the teachers do so "at least once a month" and 18.9% do so "a few times a year"). Incontrast, just under a third (31.0%) of the students indicated that they "often" read aloud inclass, while half (50.4%) the students "sometimes" do so, and close to a fifth (16.5%) "never"do so (item N[vi]).

Survey participants were asked to specify how often they participate in selected reading activitiesin English Language Arts classes. The results show that individual reading activities are muchmore common than shared reading activities. Judging from the percentage of students indicatingthat they "often" participate in the specified activities, in-class reading activities occur in thefollowing order of frequency (item N[i vii]):

silent reading (66.3%)reading to answer written questions (53.5%)oral reading (reading aloud) (31.0%)reading to find information. for research project or report (26.2%)reading to respond in a journal or log (23.0%)reading to prepare for oral discussion or oral reports (22.8%)shared reading (pairs, literature circle) (21.5%)

i 4


96

According to student responses, shared reading is the least commonly practiced reading activityin the classroom. In another related item, approximately a third (32.9%) of the students reportedbeing given weekly to daily opportunities to work in pairs or small groups for reading activities(36.6% reported having such opportunities "at least once a month," and 28.8% "never oralmost never" have such opportunitiesitem 52).

Several survey items focused further on extending reading activities through discussion at homeand at school (see Table 48 below). The results reveal that 8.0% of the students talk about theirreading at home almost every day, a quarter do so once or twice a week, just over a third doso once or twice a month, and over a quarter never or almost never engage in reading-relateddiscussion at home (item 41). When asked to indicate how often they talk or write about theirreading in school, 7.0% noted they share something daily/almost daily, over a quarter sharesomething two or three times a week, over two-fifths do so once a week or less, and over a fifth

indicated that they never or almost never share their reading experiences in school (item 44).

TABLE 48

FREQUENCY OF COMMUNICATION ABOUT READINGFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)



Response

41.

44.

How often do you talk withsomeone at home about somethingyou read?

In school, how often do you sharesomething you have read eitherthrough talking or writing?

a)b)c)d)

a)b)c)d)

Almost every day.Once or twice a week.Once or twice a month.Never or almost never.

Every day or almost every day.Two or three times a week.Once a week or less.Never or almost never.

8.0%24.936.129.1

7.027.641.421.8

The survey also inquired about student participation in teacher-initiated opportunities to extendreading experiences through personal written responses (item 54) and through projects andactivities such as drama, writing, art, or music (item 55). The responses indicate that teachersprovide more opportunities for personal written responses than for the other productiveexperiences (see Table 49 below).

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Programi

TABLE 49

FREQUENCY OF EXTENDED READING ACTIVITIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Item Reading Activity

Daily orAlmostDaily

At LeastOnce aWeek

At LeastOnce aMonth

Once aYear

or Less

54 Teacher asks students to writepersonal response. 15.5% 29.3% 29.3% 24.2%

55 Teacher provides opportunities toextend reading through projectsand activities such as drama,writing, art, music. 6.3 16.9 37.0 37.8


97

Students were questioned on the frequency with which they use particular reading strategies priorto, during and after reading activities. According to the percentage of respondents choosing thecategory "often" with respect to the individual strategies listed (item students practicethe specified reading strategies in the order of frequency reported in Table 50 below.

TABLE 50

STUDENTS' USE OF READING STRATEGIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Item JSurvey Questions on Student Use of

Reading Strategies

Frequency of Use

Often Sometimes Never

(v) Do you keep your mind on what you are reading? 67.6% 28.3% 2.2%(iii) Do you adjust your reading speed to suit the materials

you are reading? 43.6 39.5 15.3(vii) Do you try to find main ideas in what you are reading? 38.7 47.5 12.1

(ii) Do you have a clear purpose for reading before youstart? 26.9 65.9 5.8

(viii) Do you practice recalling what you have read? 26.2 51.1 21.3(vi) Do you make use of graphs, tables, charts, and pictures

while you read? 20.6 37.8 40.0(iv) Do you preview a chapter or book before you read it? 14.3 38.7 45.5


98

More than three-quarters of the students indicated that they "often" or "sometimes" practicethe following reading strategies: establishing a clear purpose for reading before starting to read;adjusting their reading speed to suit the materials being read; trying to find main ideas in whatthey are reading; recalling what they have read; and keeping their minds on what they arereading. Only the latter strategy was reported to be in frequent use by the majority of students.Two-fifths of the students noted that they "never" make use of graphs, tables, charts, andpictures while reading, and close to half "never" preview a chapter/book before reading it.

Numerous survey items also addressed the frequency with which teacher-facilitated readingstrategies are used within English Language Arts classes (see Table 51 belo,v). In respondingto these items, a small majority of students reported that their English Language Arts teacherprovides the following types of reading assistance from about half the time to almost every time:

the teacher provides students with a list of questions to answer while reading (item 48);the teacher helps students organize information after reading (item 51);the teacher and students participate in activities which help students prepare for reading(item 47).

Between a quarter and a third of the students also reported receiving the following forms ofreading assistance in English Language Arts classes from about half the time to almost everytime:

the teacher states a purpose or asks students to state a purpose for reading before they beginto read (item 53);the teacher tells students or helps students decide which reading strategy to use for aparticular reading task (item 50).

TABLE 51

TEACHER-FACILITATED USE OF READING STRATEGIESIN ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS CLASSES


Item The Teacher:

Frequency of Use

AlmostEveryTime

About Halfthe

Time or More

Less than Halfthe

Time/Never

4748505153

helps with activities to prepare for reading.provides questions to answer while reading.helps establish strategies for particular task.helps organize information after reading.states/asks for purpose before reading.

6.5%28.37.58.77.7

46.0%25.219.944.122.5

45.3%44.370.045.067.8

* These three frequency categories encompass the various frequency options listed for the respective survey items.


o CHAPTER 6


INTRODUCTION

99

The Teacher Questionnaire accompanying the grade 8 Reading Assessment (1992) was sent toa total of 38 teachers teaching English Language Arts in the French Immersion program, endwas completed by 29 teachers. The overall response rate was 76.3%.



In the final section of the survey, teachers were invited to make any additional commentsregarding the teaching of reading at the grade 8 level, as well as on the strengths and weaknessesof the grade 8 Reading Assessment.

A detailed report of the teacher survey results follows. It is important to keep in mind that thestatistics represent the responses of teachers coming from schools of varying sizes, which willaffect factors such as class size, availability of resources and support services, and so on. Unlessspecified otherwise, the percentage figures take into account all 29 teachers completing thequestionnaire. Where reported cumulative percentages do not add up to 100%, it is due torounding-off or to omission of the non-response rate. Non-respondents are excluded from themean and median figures reported.

118


100


Teaching Experience (Items I[A,

As of June, 1992, the French Immersion teachers who completed the Teache- Questionnaire hada median of fourteen years of teaching experience in total, and a median of five years ofexperience teaching Middle Years (grades 5-8) English Language Arts. Over half (55.1%) ofthe survey participants reported having more than ten years of teaching experience in total(79.3% had five or more years), and close to a third (31.0%) had more than ten years ofexperience teaching Middle Years English Language Arts (55.2% had five or more years). Itappears that many teachers now teaching grade 8 English Language Arts have spent timeteaching at other levels and/or other curricula.


Teachers were asked to specify how many three-credit courses (half courses) they had taken intotal, and in the last five years in the following areas: English (Arts Faculty); the teaching ofEnglish Language Arts (Education Faculty); and the teaching of reading (Education Faculty).The non-response rate for these survey questions was exceptionally high: more than two-fifthsof the teachers did not provide information on the number of courses taken in total, and overthree-quarters did not provide information on the number of courses taken during the past fiveyears.

The survey data on the total number of three-credit courses taken indicate the following: 6.9%of the teachers had taken no courses in English, 37.9% had taken one to ten courses, and 10.3%had taken more than ten (44.8% did not respond); 6.9% had taken no courses in the teachingof English Language Arts, 24.1% had taken one to four courses, and 27.5% had taken five ormore (41.4% did not respond); and 13.8% had taken no courses in the teaching of reading,24.1% had taken one to four courses, and 10.3% had taken five or more (51.7% did notrespond).

In total, then, survey respondents reported having taken a median of 6.0 three-credit courses inEnglish, 4.0 three-credit courses in the teaching of English Language Arts, and 1.0 three-creditcourse in the teaching of reading. The median number of three-credit courses taken by surveyrespondents in the past five years in English and in the teaching of English Language Arts was0.0 (although 10.2% of the teachers reported having obtained credits in the former and 6.8%had obtained credits in the latter during that time). During the past five years teachers had takena median of 1.0 three-credit course in the teaching of reading (with 13.6% of the teachers havingobtained credits).

Reading Fina! Report, French Immersion Program

101


Teachers were asked to rate their understanding of various areas of reading instruction currentlyemphasized in the curriculum, although they were not asked to specify how they obtained theirknowledge (that is, whether through academic course work, professional development sessions,or their own reading). As indicated in Table 52 below, over three-quarters of the teachersprofessed to have a comprehensive understanding of content area reading and reading/writingportfolios; between one-half and two-thirds professed to have a thorough understanding of wholelanguage, bulk reading, and reader response; and approximately one- to two-fifths reportedhaving a thorough understanding of the teaching of reading strategies, reading cuing systems,and developmental reading. Significantly, from just under a fifth to just over half of the teachersconsidered themselves to have only a partial understanding of the eight major areas of readinginstruction listed. In addition, approximately a fifth to a third claimed not to understand threeof the areas.

TABLE 52




UnderstandWell

UnderstandPartly

Do NotUnderstand NR

Content area reading 79.3% 17.2% 3.4% 0.0%Reading/writing portfolios 75.9 24.1 0.0 0.0Whole language 65.5 34.5 0.0 0.0Bulk reading 62.1 37.9 0.0 0.0Reader response 51.7 44.8 3.4 0.0Teaching of reading strategies 37.9 44.8 17.2 0.0Reading cuing systems 27.6 34.5 34.5 3.4Developmental reading 17.2 51.7 24.1 6.9


While few teachers reported having taken post-secondary courses in the teaching of r:-:ading/English Language Arts in the last five years, every teacher claimed to have had opportunitiesto participate in professional development in these areas during that time. Of the teachers withfive or more years of experience teaching Middle Years English Language Arts, 81.3% reportedhaving had ten or more hours of professional development in reading/English Language Artsavailable to them during the past five years, 6.3% had five to nine hours and 12.5% had oneto four hours. By comparison, 50.0% reported having taken ten or more hours of professionaldevelopment in these areas during the same period, 12.5% had taken five to nine hours, and theremainder either had not taken any (6.3%) or did not respond (31.3%). The median number of


102

hours of professional development taken by survey respondents in these areas during the pastfive years was 10.0 hours.

When requested to assess the usefulness of the professional development sessions in reading/English Language Arts in which they participated during the past five years, three-quarters ofthe teachers rated the sessions either as "extremely useful" (13.8%) or "very useful" (62.1%),and a fifth rated them as "somewhat useful" (20.7%). The question was "not applicable" for3.4% of the teachers.

Teachers were also given an opportunity to rate their need for professional development on sevendifferent topics. These topics are listed in Table 53 below according to the percentage ofteachers registering "great" or "some" need for professional development in the respectiveareas.

TABLE 53

TEACHER RATING OFPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TOPICS


Professional Development TopicsGreat + Some

NeedGreatNeed

SomeNeed

NoNeed NR

Evaluation techniques for reading 93.1% 44.8% 48.3% 6.9% 0.0%Strategies for specific types of text and I

reading processes including content areareading strategies

86.2 31.0 55.2 13.8 0.0

Avaihble reading materials 79.3 17.2 62.1 20.7 0.0Basic reading theory 79.3 13.8 65.5 20.7 0.0Teaching approaches (e.g., grouping,paired learning) 75.8 31.0 44.8 24.1 0.0Use of the curriculum documents for grade8 English Language Arts 68.9 3.4 65,5 31.0 0.0General philosophy of the EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum 58.6 0.0 58.6 41.4 0.0

Over three-quarters of the teachers noted a need for professional development on the followingtopics: evaluation techniques for reading; strategies for specific types uf text and readingprocesses including content area reading strategies; available reading materials; basic readingtheory; and teaching approaches. Over two-thirds of the teachers also registered some or greatneed for professional development sessions on the use of the curriculum documents for grade8 English Language Arts, and close to three-fifths expressed a need for sessions on the generalphilosophy of the English Language Arts curriculum. Three teachers took the opportunity tosuggest additional areas in which professional development is needed: student-centered response,and techniques for assessing cooperative learning.


121

103


Teachers were also asked to report on the availability and use of professional literature and itsinfluence on their current teaching practice. There appears to be some correlation between thefrequency with which professional materials are made available in schools and the frequencywith which teachers read professional literature on reading/language arts. According to teacherresponses, just over two-thirds (69.0%) of the schools make professional reading materialsavailable to teachers weekly or monthly, close to a fifth (17.2%) do so quarterly, and 6.9%never do so (6.9% of the teachers did not respond). Nearly three-fifths (58.6%) of the teachersreported reading articles from professional journals /books about reading/language arts weeklyor monthly, while close to two-fifths (37.9%) reported doing so every four months, and 3.4%never do so.

A vast majority of teachers indicated that the contributions/support of colleagues andadministrators with respect to promoting professional literature about reading/language arts issporadic or absent altogether: more than three-fifths noted that colleagues or administrators referto such materials every four months (31.0%) or never (31.0%); and over half noted thatadministrators encourage such reading either quarterly (20.7%) or never (34.5%). Just over athird of the teachers claimed to receive these two forms of professional support monthly.

Although 13.8% of the teachers chose not to comment on the extent to which research inreading/language arts influences their classroom teaching, just over four-fifths noted varyingdegrees of influence: approximately two-fifths (41.4%) noted weekly or monthly influence, andthe same proportion (41.4%) noted quarterly influence. A few teachers (3.4%) indicated thatresearch in this area does not influence their teaching.

Change in Teaching Practice (Item I[J, K])

Nearly all teachers (86.2%) observed changes in their teaching practice in reading/language artsover the past five years. In identifying factors contributing to these changes, the majority ofteachers credited professional development sessions/activities (75.9%), colleagues' suggestions(65.5%), and their own professional reading /study (62.1%). Changes in teaching practices werealso attributed to: curriculum guides (selected by 24.1%), and change in divisional/schoolpolicy/philosophy (selected by 37.9%). Two teachers commented on other influences such asacademic course work and change of job.


104


At the conclusion of the "Teacher Training and Professional Development" section of thesurvey, teachers were asked to rate their own qualifications to teach grade 8 English LanguageArts, taking into account their university education, professional development and experience.All teachers rated themselves either as "qualified" (37.9%) or "very qualified" (62.1%).

SCHOOL ORGANIZATION

The second section of the Teacher Questionnaire focused on the organization of the EnglishLanguage Arts program in schools, the influence teachers have in making decisions regardinglanguage arts programming, and the availability of support services for English Language Artsteachers.

Organization of English Language Arts Program (Lems II[A, B, C, D, E, F])

Of the teachers participating in the survey, approximately four-fifths (79.3%) indicated theywere teaching grade 8 English Language Arts by "choice" and a 6.9% were doing so by"negotiated choice." Over a tenth (13.8%) noted they were teaching this course by"assignment."

As shown in Table 54 below, during the 1991-92 school year survey respondents were teachinga median of 3 English Language Arts classes (10.3% were teaching one class, 31.0% wereteaching two classes, and 55.1% were teaching three or more classes), and had a median of 60English Language Arts students (20.6% had thirty or fewer students, 31.0% had from thirty-oneto sixty, and 48.3% had more than sixty). In 1991-92, the "median" grade 8 English LanguageArts teacher taught in a school operating on a 6-day cycle, within which a total of 245 minutes(or 42.3 minutes per day) were available as preparation time, and 360 minutes (or 62 minutesper day) were allotted to each English Language Arts class being taught. The recommended timeallotment for grade 8 English Language Arts in the French Immersion program is 450 minutesper 6-day cycle (or 75 minutes per day). Thus, the median time allotment reported for a specificclass falls short of the recommended time allotment.


2

105

TABLE 54

SCHOOL ORGANIZATION PROFILE (1991-1992)French Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Survey Questions

Teacher Responses

Mean Median

How many days are in your school cycle? 5.8 6.0

How many minutes are allotted to each grade 8 English Language Artsclass you teach?

per cycle: 329.5 360.0per day: 57.2 62.0

How many minutes preparation time do you have?per cycle: 243.1 245.0per day: 41.3 42.3

How many English Language Arts classes do you teach this year? 4.6 3.0

To how many students do you teach English Language Arts this year? 63.1 60.0

Teacher Influence in Decision Making (Item II[G])

Teachers were requested to rate the degree of influence they have over various decisionsconcerning the organization and teaching of grade 8 English Language Arts in their respectiveschools. Based on the teacher responses reported in Table 55 below, three-quarters of theteachers perceive themselves as having "little/no influence" regarding the overall time allotmentof the English Language Arts program; however, over four-fifths consider themselves to haveextensive influence over the division of time for the various dimensions of the English LanguageArts program.

Based on survey responses, the majority of teachers have extensive influence over the contentof the English Language Arts program and the manner in which it is taught. Approximatelytwo-thirds or more of the teachers perceived themselves as having "great influence" over thechoice of learning strategies to teach, teaching methods/strategies, evaluation methods/instruments, and teaching materials/reading program. In contrast, less than a quarter of theteachers perceived themselves as having "great influence" over the amount and kind ofprofessional development available to them (10.3% felt they had little or none) and little morethan a tenth felt they had "great influence" over the selection of school library materials (20.7%felt they had little or none). None of the teachers specified other areas of influence.

124


106

TABLE 55


French Immersion Program (Grade 8)--Area of Influence

GreatInfluence

--Some


Choice of learning strategies to teach 93.1% 3.4% 3.4% 0.0%Choice of teaching methods/strategies 89.7 10.3 0.0 0.0The division of time within the ELA's timeallotment (reading, writing, listening,speaking, viewing, language study, literature) 82.8 17.2 0.0 0.0Choice of evaluation methods/instruments 75.9 24.1 0.0 0.0Choice of teaching materials/reading program 65.5 34.5 0.0 0.0The amount and kind of professionaldevelopment 24.1 62.1 10.3 3.4Materials added to the school library 13.8 62.1 20.7 3.4The overall time allotment 3.4 20.7 75.9 0.0

The survey data suggest that while teachers feel they have a great deal of influence overdecisions directly related to their individual approach to teaching/learning, they perceivethemselves to have little decision-making power in relation to teaching resources that areessential for effective teaching.

Availability of Support Services (Item II[H])

Survey participants were given an opportunity to comment on the extent to which specific typesof support services are available in their schools, choosing one of three response options: "veryavailable," "available," and "not available." When reviewing the teacher ratings reported inTable 56 below, it is important to keep in mind that the availability of resources is dependentupon the size, clientele needs and policy decisions of schools/divisions represented in the survey.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 1 2 5

I

I

e107

TABLE 56

TEACHER RATING OFAVAILABILITY OF SUPPORT SERVICES IN SCHOOLS




Available NR

Resource teacher(s) 37.9% 58.6% 3.4% 0.0%Library technician(s) 31.0 55.2 6.9 6.9Qualified teacher-librarian(s) 27.6 41.4 31.0 0.0Department head or team leader(s) 24.1 37.9 37.9 0.0Teacher aide(s) 13.8 65.5 17.2 3.4Divisional consultant(s) 13.8 62.1 20.7 3.4Special education teacher(s) 6.9 27.6 65.5 0.0Speech pathologist(s) 3.4 82.8 10.3 3.4

According to the teacher ratings reported in Table 56, five of the eight support services listedare "not available" to a substantial proportion of teachers: two-thirds have no access to specialeducation teachers; about a third have no access to department head or team leaders or toqualified teacher-librarians; and approximately a fifth do not have access to divisional consultantsand teacher aides. A tenth of the teachers also indicated that speech pathologists are not availablein their schools. Four of the eight support services were reported to be readily available by aapproximately a quarter or more of the teachers: department head or team leaders, qualifiedteacher-librarians, library technicians, and resource teachers. None of the survey participantsresponded to the request to report on the availability of other kinds of support services.

THE CURRICULUM

The third section of the Teacher Questionnaire requested information on the availability of theEnglish Language Arts curriculum documents (item III[A]), the extent to which teachersunderstand and use these documents (items III[B, C]), and the adequacy of the Middle YearsEnglish Language Arts curriculum guide (item III[D]).

As indicated in Table 57 below, most teachers claimed to have a copy of both English LanguageArts: Overview K-12 (1988) and English Language Arts: Middle Years (1982), whereas justover half claimed to have a copy of the Middle Years Source Book (1984). The majority ofteachers professed to make infrequent or no use of the three curriculum publications.

1 2 I'l


108

TABLE 57



Curriculum Document


Yes No NR N/A Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never NR

English Language Arts:Overview K-12 (1988) 82.8% 10.3% 6.9% 0.0% 3.4% 58.6% 17.2% 20.7%

English Language Arts:Middle Years (1982) 93.1 6.9 0.0 3.4 20.7 58.6 10.3 6.9

Middle Years SourceBook (1984) 55.2 41.4 3.4 0.0 0.0 48.3 24.1 27.6

Approximately ten teachers provided explanations of why they rarely or never use one or moreof the documents, six claimed not to have copies of the relevant document(s), one claimed notto be aware of the existence of the Middle Years Source Book, one remarked on the excessivelength of the guide, and two professed to use other resources.

One of the items in this section of the survey gave teachers an opportunity to rate the need forrevision of the content of the English Language Arts: Middle Years curriculum guide (itemIII[D]). On average, half the teachers noted satisfaction with the various components of theguide, just over a quarter registered dissatisfaction, and close to a quarter declined to give arating (see Table 58 below).


S109

TABLE 58TEACHER RATING OF NEED FOR REVISION OF

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS: MIDDLE YEARSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 8)

Content AreaSatisfactory/Does

Not Need RevisionUnsatisfactory/Needs Revision NR

IntroductionGoals and Objectives from theOverview K-12 62.1% 13.8% 24.1%

OracyListening 62.1 13.8 24.1Oral Language 62.1 10.3 27.6Drama 41.4 27.6 31.0

LiteracyVisual Communication 41.4 31.0 27.6Handwriting 34.5 34.5 31.0Reading and Literature 51.7 31.0 17.2Composing and Writing 58.6 24.1 17.2Spelling 44.8 37.9 17.2Language Structure and Usage 48.3 37.9 13.8Dictionary Studies 48.3 31.0 20.7

Although few teachers reported making frequent use of the curriculum documents, nearly all(96.5%) rated their knowledge of the grade 8 English Language Arts curriculum documents as"adequate" or "very adequate" (3.4% judged their knowledge to be "inadequate"). Further-more, almost all teachers considered themselves to have an adequate or highly adequateunderstanding of what grade 8 students should be doing in English Language Arts (89.7%), andof the teaching strategies appropriate for grade 8 English Language Arts (96.6%). The responserate for this item was 100%.

TEACHING MATERIALS

The "Teaching Materials" section of the Teacher Questionnaire inquired about the type, range,quality and availability of materials used in teaching grade 8 English Language Arts. In the firstitem, teachers were presented with a list of ten different types of teaching materials and askedto estimate the frequency with which they used the materials in their reading/English LanguageArts program in the 1991-92 school year (item IV[A]). The respective materials are listed inTable 59 below according to the reported frequency of "weekly" and "monthly" use combined.


I 2 8

110

TABLE 59



Materials Used

Frequency of Use


Reference materials 72.4% 27.6% 44.8% 24.1% 0.0% 3.4%

Newspapers, magazines 72.4 20.7 51.7 24.1 0.0 3.4

Videotapes/films, audiotapes 68.9 3.4 65.5 27.6 0.0 3.4

Content area material 65.5 51.7 13.8 24.1 3.4 6.9

Computers 58.6 44.8 13.8 17.2 17.2 6.9

Student-authored materials(e.g., anthologies) 48.2 17.2 31.0 31.0 13.8 6.9

Integrated language series 44.8 20.7 24.1 27.6 17.2 10.3

Environmental print(e.g., ads, brochures) 37.9 3.4 34.5 44.8 13.8 3.4

Basal readers 13.7 3.4 10.3 27.6 48.3 10.3

Trade literature 10.3 3.4 6.9 20.7 51.7 17.2

According to the survey results, teachers use a variety of different materials in their EnglishLanguage Arts programs although the frequency of use varies considerably. It appears thatteachers favour the use of reference materials, newspapers/magazines, videotapes/films andaudiotapes, content area material, and computers, with the majority of the teachers indicatingthey use these materials weekly/monthly. Between a third and half the teachers also estimatedthat they make weekly/monthly use of the following: environmental print, integrated languageseries, and student-authored materials. Approximately half the teachers indicated they never usebasal readers or trade literature.

Teachers were also invited to rate various factors influencing the choice and quality of EnglishLanguage Arts materials used in the 1991-92 school year (item IV[B]). The ratings presentedin Table 60 below indicate that a vast majority of teachers feel they have good or excellent

access to a variety of materials, and consider the quality and relevance of available materials andthe range of reading levels in the available materials to be good or excellent. Approximately halfthe teachers also gave a rating of good or excellent to: Canadian content of available materials;access to information about new materials; and access to commercial teacher guides.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program12`)

111

TABLE 60



Teaching MaterialsExcellent+Good Excellent Good Fair Poor NR

Access to a variety of materials 89.6% 31.0% 58.6% 10.3% 0.0% 0.0%Quality and relevance of materialsavailable 86.2 24.1 62.1 13.8 0.0 0.0Range of reading levels in availablematerial 79.3 27.6 51.7 17.2 3.4 0.0Access to information about newmaterials 55.1 10.3 44.8 41.4 3.4 0.0Access to commercial teacher guides 51.7 6.9 44.8 31.0 17.2 0.0Canadian content of available materials 48.2 10.3 37.9 41.4 10.3 0.0

More than two-thirds of the survey participants (69.0%) noted that they are able to purchasematerials not on the Manitoba authorized textbook list (item IV[C]); however, only a fifth of theteachers (20.7%) indicated that their school has a review process for evaluating these materials(item IV[D]).

TEACHING PRACTICES

The purpose of this section of the Teacher Questionnaire was to obtain information on the rangeand balance of teaching strategies practiced by English Language Arts teachers, and theimportance educators ascribe to various reading activities, strategies and skills.

Teaching Strategies Used (Item V[A])

Survey participants were asked to specify the frequency with which they use variousteacher-centered and student-centered activities in their teaching of reading/English LanguageArts. The activities are listed in Table 61 below according to the reported frequency of "daily"and "weekly" use combined.


112

TABLE 61



Frequency of Use

Strategies Used Daily +Weekly

Daily Weekly Monthly Never NR


Mini-lesson to whole class 93.1% 24.1% 69.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.9%Large-group discussion 93.1 24.1 69.0 0.0 0.0 6.9Reading aloud to class 72.4 27.6 44.8 20.7 0.0 6.9Lecture to whole class(little discussion) 51.7 10.3 41.4 31.0 10.3 6.9


Uninterrupted Sustained SilentReading (USSR) 89.6 24.1 65.5 6.9 0.0 3.4Small-group work fordiscussion/sharing/assignments 86.2 27.6 58.6 10.3 0.0 3.4Reader response logs/journals 62.1 20.7 41.4 31.0 3.4 3.4Bulk reading 62.0 17.2 44.8 24.1 6.9 6.9Peer tutoring 58.6 13.8 44.8 17.2 13.8 10.3Reading conferences 34.5 0.0 34.5 41.4 17.2 6.9Cross-age reading 10.3 0.0 10.3 13.8 62.1 13.8Readers theatre 3.4 0.0 3.4 51.7 34.5 10.3

The survey data suggest that teacher-centered strategies are commonly practiced in most grade 8English Language Arts classrooms: over nine-tenths of the teachers present mini-lessons to thewhole class and lead large-group discussion daily/weekly, nearly three-quarters read aloud to theclass daily/weekly, and half present whole-class lectures daily/weekly.

Two of the eight student-centered activities listed were likewise identified by almost nine-tenthsof the teachers as being in daily/weekly use: small-group work (for discussion, sharing, andassignment completion) and Uninterrupted Sustained Silent Reading (USSR). Approximatelythree-fifths also reported making daily/weekly use of peer tutoring, reader response logs/journals, and bulk reading. Significantly, close to a fifth of the teachers indicated they never usereading conferences in the reading program, just over a third never use readers theatre, andthree-fifths never use cross-age reading.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 1 3 1

Importance of Teaching Practices (Item V[13])

113

The second item in this section of the survey asked teachers to rate the importance of variousinstructional objectives/goals, reading activities/strategies, and process skills currentlyemphasized in the reading/English Language Arts curriculum. A review of the teacher responsesreported in Table 62 below gives a clear indication that each aspect of the reading program listedin the survey holds a place of importance for virtually every teacher, only the degree ofimportance varies.

More than two-thirds of the teachers assigned a rating of "very important" to four of the elevenreading program components listed: variety of reading material; opportunities for personalresponse; pre-reading activities and setting purpose for reading; and oral discussion of materialsread. Between half and two-thirds of the teachers also ascribed great importance to:differentiated learning experiences; collaborative learning experiences; student understanding anduse of specific strategies for reading different types of materials; oral reading fluency; andflexibility of reading rate (silent reading). Student knowledge of literary concepts and studentunderstanding of the three major cuing systems in reading were viewed as somewhat importantby the majority of teachers. These ratings suggest that teachers perceive themselves as valuinga variety of teaching practices in the reading/English Language Arts program.

TABLE 62




VeryImportant

SomewhatImportant

NotImportant NR

Variety of reading material 96.6% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0%Opportunities for personal response 82.8 17.2 0.0 0.0Pre-reading activities and setting purposefor reading 79.3 20.7 0.0 0.0Oral discussion of materials read 72.4 27.6 0.0 0.0Differentiated learning experiences 65.5 31.0 0.0 3.4Collaborative learning experiences 62.1 34.5 0.0 3.4Student understanding and use of specificstrategies for reading different types ofmaterials 62.1 31.0 3.4 3.4Oral reading fluency 58.6 41.4 0.0 0.0Flexibility of reading rate (silent reading) 55.2 44.8 0.0 0.0Student understanding and use of the threemajor cuing systems in reading 31.0 51.7 6.9 10.3Student knowledge of literary concepts 27.6 69.0 3.4 0.0

132


114

EVALUATION

In the "Evaluation" section of the survey, teachers had an opportunity to rate the importanceof a range of products and processes used in evaluating students in reading (item VI[A]).According to the teacher ratings reported in Table 63 below, the majority of teachers value awide range of products and processes in assessing reading.

TABLE 63





NotImportant NR


Projects/presentations 75.9% 20.7% 3.4% 0.0%Daily work assignments 72.4 20.7 6.9 0.0Reading/writing portfolios 69.0 24.1 6.9 0.0Reading response journals or logs 44.8 48.3 6.9 0.0Bulk reading lists and experiences 44.8 41.4 13.8 0.0Written tests or examinations 20.7 69.0 10.3 0.0Oral tests 13.8 79.3 6.9 0.0Informal reading inventories 13.8 69.0 13.8 3.4Cloze tests 6.9 62.1 31.0 0.0Standardized tests 0.0 48.3 51.7 0.0


Self-evaluation 72.4 27.6 0.0 0.0Attitudes to reading 69.0 27.6 3.4 0.0Group participation 62.1 37.9 0.0 0.0Observation 55.2 44.8 0.0 0.0Individual conferencing 55.2 44.8 0.0 0.0Strategy evaluation 27.6 51.7 13.8 6.9Peer evaluation 24.1 69.0 6.9 0.0

All but two of the products and processes listed were identified by nearly every teacher as"somewhat important" or "very important" means of evaluating students in the readingdimension of the English Language Arts curriculum. The two exceptions were doze tests andstandardized tests, dismissed as unimportant by approximately one-third and one-half of theteachers respectively.


1.33

115

Over two-thirds of the teachers gave a "very important" rating to three of the ten evaluationsfocusing on product: projects/presentations; daily work assignments; and reading/writing port-folios. From approximately one-fifth to over two-fifths of the survey respondents also emphasiz-ed the importance of: reading response journals/logs; bulk reading lists and experiences; andwritten tests or examinations. Informal reading inventories and oral tests were considered "veryimportant" by a little over a tenth of the teachers.

A majority of teachers also assigned a "very important" rating to five of the seven forms ofevaluation focusing on process: self-evaluation; attitudes to reading; group participation;observation; and individual conferencing. Approximately a quarter of the teachers consideredpeer evaluation and strategy evaluation to be of great importance.

Three of the twenty-nine survey participants responded to the invitation to comment on any othertypes of evaluation employed during the past year in addition to those listed in the questionnaire(item VI[B]). Respondents commented on the use of doze tests, collaborative learning processevaluation, and formative evaluation.

The last question relating to student evaluation inquired about the percentage of time teachersspend in formative evaluation and summative evaluation respectively (item VI[C]). Based ontheir responses, grade 8 English Language Arts teachers spend a median of 60% of theirevaluation time in formative evaluation, and a median of 40% in summative evaluation.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Survey participants were given an opportunity to make additional comments regarding theteaching of reading at the grade 8 level (item VII[A]). Two-fifths (20.7%) of the teachersresponded, offering a total of seven comments. Two teachers emphasized the need forupdated/additional curriculum resources, three specified needs related to reading materials, oneidentified a need for professional development, and one reflected on student motivation.

Teachers were also invited to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the grade 8 ReadingAssessment (item VII[B]). Two of the survey participants noted weaknesses, one criticizing thesuggested time allotments for administering the test and the other stating objections to theselect-type items on the assessment. The teachers' comments will be useful in the developmentof future assessments.

I 3 4Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

117

CHAPTER 7




Response Rate

With a few exceptions, the rate of response to both the multiple-choice and open-ended itemson the grade 8 Reading Assessment was remarkably high. The high level of participationsuggests that students were engaged in the assessment reading materials and tasks, and that theyreacted positively to the assessment.


In responding to the Meaning Vocabulary items, the vast majority of students demonstrated theirability to understand words whose meaning, whether literal or metaphoric, was explicitly statedin the text. A substantial proportion, however, had difficulty understanding vocabulary whosemeaning could be inferred from implicit contextual clues. These results suggest that, whendealing with vocabulary, teachers need to continue emphasizing the use of contextual clues toderive implicit meaning from text.


Students gave a strong performance on the Literal Comprehension subtest, especially on themultiple-choice items requiring a literal reading of the short story and the table. A large majorityalso responded successfully to the multiple-choice items requiring an understanding of explicitlystated meaning in the expository reading selections; however, less than a tenth of the studentsprovided fully or partially satisfactory responses to the one exposition-related item requiring anopen-ended response (item E).

135


118

The weak performance on the open-ended response item may suggest that students had difficultyunderstanding the wording or structure of the question itself, a factor which could also partiallyaccount for the comparatively low scores for one of the multiple-choice items relating to theexposition (item 24). This possible explanation raises concern about whether students are beingtaught how to work with a sufficiently wide range of question types.

Responses to the open-ended item further suggest that students do not have sufficient skillsand/or experiences in adapting their reading strategies to suit a particular type of text. Thisfinding has numerous instructional implications. To enable students to construct meaning fromtext, they need to be taught to adjust their reading strategies to suit different types of text,especially exposition. Students need to be taught how expository material is constructed and howexpository arguments are made (for example, by exploring authorial intent, method and voice).The strategies or methods specified in the given article (for example, observation and research)are the very strategies students should be taught to look for in other expository texts, in additionto using them in their own expository writing. Finally, students need to be taught the importanceof testing the validity of the methods used by writers to draw conclusions.


Responses to several items on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest reveal that a highpercentage of students lack the cognitive strategies required to differentiate implicitly statedtextual information from explicitly stated information, or to sort relevant from irrelevant data.For two items (items 14, 36) a large proportion of students chose responses demonstrating aliteral reading of a text where an inferential or interpretive reading was required. These resultsraise concerns about whether students are taught to work with a sufficiently wide range ofquestion types and/or are taught to ask questions that will help them distinguish what type of task(for example, literal or inferential) is required.

The high percentage of wrong responses to both the poetry-related items on this subtest (items36, I(i&ii]) shows that many students had great difficulty interpreting the poetry selection on theassessment. This suggests that students may not have the experience, or may not bedevelopmentally ready, to process or interpret complex poetry independently. At this level,students may require interactive experiences (such as discussion) to develop their interpretivecomprehension skills related to poetry. A further implication of this finding is that theinterpretation of poetry should not be an independent activity in an assessment without propersupports such as appropriate background knowledge and the ability to adapt reading style to aparticular text.

Student performance on the items dealing with text presented in tabular form was considerablylower on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest than on the Literal Comprehension subtest.Whereas nearly all students demonstrated the ability to read and understand statisticalinformation on a literal level (items 56, 57, 58), a comparatively low percentage of the students


S

119

were successful in manipulating and interpreting statistical data (items 59, 60). This findingraises the question of whether classroom teachlitg related to tables and charts is limited to aliteral level.

Since members of society are increasingly required to make meaning of data presented in tableand chart form in daily life (for example, in the media), it is crucial that the ability to makemeaning of data be viewed and taught as a necessary life skill. Students need to be provided withstrategies for making meaning of statistical information and be given appropriate opportunitiesto practice reading, manipulating, interpreting and drawing conclusions from data. This mayinvolve interactive situations (such as debating) in which students are required to draw on andexplore the implications of statistical data.


Although the mean performance was lower on the Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest thanon any of the other subtests, there is some cause for optimism in the observation that nearlythree-quarters of the open-ended responses were scored as complete or partial responses.However, the high percentage of responses reflecting only a partial understanding of the variousreading materials and/or tasks indicates that students need further encouragement and experiencein giving appropriate support and/or evidence for their observations and comments.

There is also evidence in the subtest results that students need to continue developing theirunderstanding of the relationship (relevanc-;) between reading and the real-world context. Thisneed is reflected in the comparatively high non-response rate for a number of items relyingheavily on students' ability to link the reading material with their own knowledge/experience ofthe real world and vice versa. Many students require guidance in understanding this strategy andusing it more effectively.


In general, students performed almost equally well on the items assessing their own use ofreading strategies a; on those assessing their skill in reviewing the strategies or techniquesemployed within the selected reading materials. A review of the results for the individual itemson this subtest strongly suggests, however, that students experience much greater difficultyprocessing exposition than they do processing narration (a difference which is much moreapparent in the results for this subtest than for any of the other subtests). The majority ofstudents were unsuccessful in selecting an effective reading strategy for the expository readingselections and in identifyirI3 an effective question to monitor their comprehension of a particularexpository text. These findings may be an indication that students are given inadequate exposureto expository text patterns and the use of strategies needed to process this type of readingmaterial.


120


Students' Self-Concept as Readers and Interest in Reading

There are some highly encouraging findings in the grade 8 Student Reading Survey results.Survey responses indicate that a high percentage of grade 8 students have positive self-esteemas readers, experience little difficulty in any area of reading, and spend time reading forenjoyment. The data showing that over three-quarters of the students spend their own money onreading material reflect a high level of interest in reading, and may also indicate the availabilityof book sales in schools (for example, book clubs or fairs may encourage such purchases). Alsonoteworthy is the finding that over two-thirds of the students trade or share reading material withfriends, which suggests the informal sharing of reading interests among peers even though fewstudents reported the frequent sharing of reading either at home or at school.

Types of Reading Material

According to the students' estimations of the frequency with which they read various materialsin school, the curriculum objective of balancing a wide range of reading materials is beingachieved in the majority of classrooms. Unfortunately, however, the majority of students haveinfrequent or minimal opportunities to choose the reading materials explored in the EnglishLanguage Arts program. This lack of choice is contrary to the curriculum emphasis on theimportance of encouraging students to choose reading materials, which enables them to takeownership of their reading/learning by promoting decision making and increasing motivation,attentiveness and enjoyment.

Despite having inadequate choice in reading material in the classroom, students show signs oftaking ownership of their reading outside of school. Most students reported that they often orsometimes read material related to a television show or a movie, parts of the newspaper besidesthe comics or sports, and news in a magazine or newspaper. This indicates that students areusing reading material (language) to gather information in their daily lives. Furthermore, nearlyall students indicated they often or sometimes read more than one book by the same author. Byidentifying and/or searching out their favourite authors, students are developing and exercisingpersonal reading preferences to enhance their enjoyment of reading.

When asked to identify their out-of-school reading preferences, the majority of students selectedeight of the twelve text types listed. Approximately nine-tenths selected magazines, four-fifthsselected fiction, and over two-thirds selected comics, newspapers, and advertisements/signs/menus. However, less than a third of the students reported reading poetry and just over a thirdreported reading non-fiction and maps, charts and graphs outside of school, which may beindicative of an inadequate ability to interpret such materials independently.


133

121

Although the survey results show that students read a variety of different texts outside of school,they appear to have the strongest preference for magazines. One may question whether thematerial most commonly read by students will influence the development of essential readingskills. For instance, the structure or format of magazines may hinder the development of readingfluency. Furthermore, given the vast choice of magazines available to young people and theirinfluence in shaping values (for example, with respect to self-image, gender roles/stereotyping),there is also a concern about whether students have the necessary skills to choose materialsselectively and to read them critically. These findings have serious instructional implications.Teachers need to continue to ensure that the range of reading materials explored in thecurriculum is balanced and encourage students to read texts that contribute to the developmentof essential reading skills such as fluency in reading. In addition, teachers need to provideinstruction in critical reading and examination of various types of reading materials, particularlythose materials students tend to read on their own.

Types of Reading Activities

The survey data regarding the types of reading activities practiced in the English Language Artsprogram are cause for major concern. According to the survey responses, students perceiveteachers to have a distinct preference for individual reading activities over interactive readingactivities. The majority of students feel they have frequent opportunities to participate inindividual reading activities such as reading to answer written questions and reading silently.Comparatively few students feel they have frequent occasions to participate in interactive and/orextended reading experiences such as: reading aloud; reading to prepare for oral discussion ororal reports; reading to respond in a journal or log; extending reading through projects andactivities such as drama, writing, art and music; or engaging in shared reading (working inpairs, small groups, literature circles).

Considering that students perceive themselves to have limited opportunities for interactiveexperiences in the classroom, it may not be surprising that such a high percentage of studentsrarely or never share their reading with others either at home or at school. Educators need tocontinue to promote the sharing of reading experiences in and out of school.


According to the survey results, the majority of students do not routinely practice many of thereading strategies that characterize strong readers. Of particular concern is the finding that onlyabout a quarter of the students "often" have a clear purpose for reading before they start toread. Furthermore, almost half "never" preview a chapter or book before they read it, astrategy which is especially relevant to expository text. The data indicating that two-fifths of thestudents "never" make use of graphs, tables, charts and pictures while reading are alsodisturbing given that there is an increasing demand for the use of this strategy in daily life. The

t 39


122

only reading strategy which the majority of students identified as being in frequent use was thatof keeping their minds on what they read.

The students' observations regarding teacher-facilitated use of reading strategies point to somepositive as well as some negative practices. According to the students' perceptions, the majorityof teachers regularly (from about half to almost all the time) include activities that help studentsprepare for reading. Only a relatively small percentage, however, regularly facilitate students'reading by helping them establish a purpose prior to reading and/or by helping them decidewhich strategy to use for a particular reading task. These findings, combined with the evidencethat students make limited independent use of pre-reading strategies, may be an indication thatteachers need to place greater emphasis on identifying pre-reading activities.

The survey results further indicate that over half the teachers frequently give students a list ofquestions to answer while they read. Provided that the questions being asked are of the kind thathelp students process their reading, this practice can be viewed favourably. However, if teachersare supplying questions which exclusively value or reinforce lower level thinking (for example,literal comprehension) or which prevent choice and independent thinking on the part of students,the use of questions may be detrimental to student learning and growth.

It is possible that the students' perceptions of the use of the various reading strategies may notcorrespond with actual practice. If teachers neglect to verbalize the use of the various strategies,students may fail to register their use. Educators must use the appropriate language if theyexpect students to learn the conscious application and articulation of reading strategies.



The grade 8 English Language Arts teachers completing the Teacher Questionnaire represent ahighly experienced group of teachers. Respondents reported a median of fourteen years ofteaching experience in total and a median of five years of experience teaching Middle YearsEnglish Language Arts. The observation that many teachers currently teaching grade 8 EnglishLanguage Arts appear to have spent time teaching at other levels and/or other curricula raisesquestions about whether these teachers are teaching in or outside their area of specialization orexpertise and whether they have received adequate professional development for their new tasks.

According to the survey responses, teachers have acquired very little recent academic trainingin English or in the teaching of reading and English Language Arts. (The high non-response ratefor the items inquiring about academic training in these areas suggests that many teachers werereluctant to provide this information and places limitations on the interpretation of the findings.)All teachers reported having had some professional development opportunities related to reading/English Language Arts in the past five years, although the median number of hours ofprofessional development taken in these areas during that five-year period was only two hours


123

per year. This apparent shortage of professional development activity leads to speculations aboutwhether the time available for such activity has been reduced, whether reading/language arts arenot regarded as important components of professional development, and who has or takeseducational leadership or responsibility for meeting teachers' professional needs.

S

The survey information strongly suggests teachers are receiving inadequate support fromeducational leaders with respect to promoting and encouraging the reading of professionalliterature. It also suggests a correspondence between the availability of professional readingmaterials in school and the extent to which teachers make use of professional literature relatedto reading/language arts. A process needs to be established whereby teachers are encouraged toparticipate in identifying their professional development needs and in choosing the kinds ofresources that will help meet these needs.

In rating their need for professional development on various topics listed in the survey,approximately three- to four-fifths of the teachers registered some or great need in theory-relatedareas, while approximately three-quarters to just over nine-tenths registered some or great needwith respect to practical application topics such as evaluation techniques for reading, strategiesfor specific types of text and reading processes including content area reading strategies,available reading materials, and teaching approaches. The 100% response rate for this item maybe a further indication of the urgency of teachers' professional development needs and theirdesire to be involved in decisions relating to professional development.

Given their limited dependence on academic course work to upgrade their knowledge, and theirlow participation in professional development sessions in the areas of reading/English LanguageArts during recent years, it is perhaps not surprising that such a high percentage of teachersreported either a partial understanding or lack of understanding of some major areas of readinginstruction currently emphasized in the curriculum. According to the self-ratings reported in thesurvey, approximately one-half to four-fifths of the teachers feel they have a thorough grasp ofreader response, bulk reading, whole language, reading/writing portfolios, and content areareading, and less than two-fifths feel they have a thorough understanding of the teaching ofreading strategies, developmental reading, and reading cuing systems. Clearly, a higher levelof knowledge of reading instruction would be desirable.

Despite reporting limited involvement in academic and professional development activity in thefive years preceding the survey, nearly all teachers observed changes in their teaching practiceduring that time. The majority of teachers attributed these changes to the influence ofprofessional development sessions/activities, colleagues' suggestions, and their own professionalreading/study. Close to two-fifths identified divisional/school policy/philosophy and a quarteridentified curriculum guides as factors contributing to instructional changes. Overall, the surveydata suggest that personal initiative and interaction with colleagues may have played a somewhatgreater role in shaping change than educational leadership from schools and school divisions,universities, and Manitoba Education and Training.

141


124

Taking into consideration their university education, professional development and experience,all teachers judged themselves to be qualified or highly qualified to teach grade 8 EnglishLanguage Arts. It would appear that in many instances the teachers' self-ratings may have beenmade more on the strength of their experience than on their recent involvement in academiccourse work or professional development sessions.

School Organization

The finding that about four-fifths of the survey participants teach grade 8 English Language Artsby "choice" (while the rest do so by "negotiated choice" or by "assignment") may be anindication that most teachers are teaching in their area of expertise.

The survey data reveal that a large majority of teachers feel they have extensive influence overdecisions related to how the English Language Arts program is taught, but have limited influenceover decisions related to teaching resources such as the amount and kind of professionaldevelopment opportunities made available and the selection of school library materials. Both ofthese teaching resources are essential for effective teaching and particularly at a time when majorshifts in curriculum/educational emphases are taking place.

It is possible, however, that the teachers' perceptions of the extent of their decision-makinginfluence is incommensurate with their actual influence, in which case teachers may need tore-examine their perceptions. In any case, teachers should either have more influence or exercisethe influence they have. It is crucial that processes be put in place to ensure active teacherinvolvement in professional development planning/decisions and in library material selection.Such a process might include opportunities for more collegial connections to promote planningof school-based professional development activity, sharing of professional information, andmodelling of teaching innovations.

In addition to reporting limited influence over decisions related to teaching resources, teachersreported limited availability of various types of support services in their-schools. A significantpercentage of teachers indicated that the respective services were "not available." The responseoption "not available" could have been interpreted in a number of different ways: not offeredin the school; not accessible even if personnel are ostensibly available; or not necessary/applicable (as determined by size of school/division, the needs of the local student population,and policy decisions). It is not clear how teachers interpreted this category. Regardless ofwhether the support services exist, a high percentage of teachers feel they do not have accessto them. It is imperative that local jurisdictions apply the survey data to their particularsituations.


125

The Curriculum

Although almost every teacher professed to have a copy of the two curriculum guides, EnglishLanguage Arts: Overview K-12 and English Language Arts: Middle Years, only a little over halfclaimed to have a copy of the Middle Years Source Book. Administrators need to ensure thatteachers are aware of the existence of and have access to curriculum support materials,particularly considering the number of teachers teaching English Language Arts by assignment,rather than by choice.

While about half the teachers indicated their satisfaction with the various components of thecurriculum documents, the vast majority of teachers indicated that they make infrequent or nouse of these three documents. At the same time, very few teachers judged their knowledge ofthe curriculum to be inadequate, and virtually all teachers rated their understanding of whatgrade 8 English Language Arts students should be learning and of appropriate teaching strategiesvery highly. This is somewhat surprising when linked to the level of student achievement onthe interpretive and critical-reflective comprehension subtests. Teachers may need to reflect onthe level of their knowledge about curriculum approaches and strategies which facilitate higher-order reading and thinking.

Teaching Materials

The survey data regarding the frequency with which teachers used a specified list of teachingmaterials during the 1991-92 school year suggest that teachers use a variety of different materialsin their teaching of reading/English Language Arts, although the frequency of use variesconsiderably. From approximately a quarter to half the teachers claimed to make weekly use ofcontent area material, reference material, and computers. However, survey respondents mayhave applied varying interpretations to the terms designating the various teaching materials inthe survey. For example, instead of interpreting the term "content area material" as expositorymaterial written for any subject, some teachers may have thought it referred to literary materialor to material related specifically to English Language Arts. Given the scope for varyinginterpretations of the terms, the results regarding the use of specific teaching materials may beinconclusive.

On the whole, teachers appear to be satisfied both with their access to teaching materials andwith the content of available materials. It is noteworthy, however, that whereas just over halfthe teachers felt they had good or excellent access to information about new materials, almosthalf felt they had fair or poor access. This raises the question of whether teachers are aware ofavailable resources (for example, Manitoba Education and Training evaluates materials andprovides extensive lists of approved and recommended materials in the Manitoba Text BookBureau catalogue). It is encouraging to note that a substantial majority of teachers are able topurchase materials not on the Manitoba Text Book Bureau lists. What is of concern, however,is that only about a fifth of the teachers surveyed indicated that their school has a review processfor evaluating these materials. To encourage and assist teachers in choosing appropriate

1 43


126

classroom materials, Manitoba Education and Training may need to publicize more widely itscriteria/process for evaluating and selecting material contained in Selection of LearningResources: Policies and Procedures for Manitoba Schools (1990) published by ManitobaEducation and Training. Schools and school divisions should also be reminded of Manitoba'sSchool Library Policy Statement (1991).

Teaching Practices

Some favourable trends are evident in the survey data regarding teaching practices. With respectto teacher-centered activities, it is encouraging to note that a large majority of teachers professedto read aloud to students regularly (daily or weekly) and that the use of mini-lessons to the wholeclass is much more common than the use of lectures to the whole class. The data pointing to thefrequent use of both large-group discussion and small-group work for discussion, sharing, andassignment completion by nearly all teachers are likewise significant, particularly consideringthat interactive learning exi, 'riences play a major role in enabling students to develop interpretiveand critical-reflective comprehension. In addition to including small-group work on a regularbasis, the majority of teachers appear to be using a variety of other student-centered activitiesin their teaching of reading /English Language Arts, a finding which is consistent with thecurriculum emphasis on student-centered activity. Teachers need to be commended on their useof a variety of teaching strategies and encouraged to continue to explore a wide range ofavailable options for student-centered activities.

The importance ratings of various dimensions of reading instruction similarly suggest thatteachers perceive a variety of teaching practices to be desirable and important. Significantly,almost all teachers emphasized the importance of "variety of reading material," and aboutfour-fifths stressed the importance of "opportunities for personal response" and "pre-readingactivities and setting purpose for reading." Only a small majority, however, stressed the valueof "student understanding and use of specific strategies for reading different types of materials."

Evaluation

The survey data suggest that most English Language Arts teachers ascribe some or great valueto a variety of products and processes in evaluating student progress in reading. Of particularsignificance is the finding that the majority of teachers emphasize the importance of thefollowing five processes: self-evaluation; attitudes to reading; group participation; observation;and individual conferencing.

One major concern emerging from the results is that only a little over a quarter of the teachersrated strategy evaluation as very important, even though in another part of the survey just overthree-fifths emphasized the importance of student understanding and use of specific strategiesfor reading different types of text. If teachers do not value the assessment of reading strategies,they may also neglect to incorporate the teaching of reading strategies. The low value placed on


144

127

strategy evaluation and the limited or lack of understanding of the teaching of reading strategiesreported by the majority of teachers may be indicative of teachers' need for assistance in thisarea. Significantly, almost all teachers registered some or great need for professionaldevelopment on the topic of "strategies for specific types of text and reading processes includingcontent area reading strategies." It is essential that educational leaders respond to this need forassistance.

SUMMARY OF GRADE S READING ASSESSMENT RESULTS


Overall, students appear to be more proficient at tasks requiring literal comprehension than theyare at tasks demanding inferential and critical-reflective comprehension. This observation raisesconcerns about whether the instructional time spent on developing literal comprehension skillsis disproportionate to the time spent on developing inferential and critical-reflectivecomprehension skills, and whether students are involved in appropriate activities through whichto explore inferential and critical-reflective reading tasks. The students' performance may be anindication that they have insufficient opportunities to engage in co-operative and collaborativereading activities which are conducive to learning and applying inferential and critical-reflectivethinking strategies/processes.

Students demonstrated strong literal comprehension skills in relation to each of the four typesof text included in the Reading Assessment materials: narration, poetry, exposition and a table.Although the mean performance was substantially higher on the Literal Comprehension subtestthan on the Interpretive Comprehension and Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtests, theresults for the latter two also leave room for optimism. For example, the high percentage ofcomplete and partial responses to the open-ended items on the latter two subtests may beevidence that many students have gained or are in the process of developing inferential andcritical-reflective comprehension skills. The open-ended resvmses demonstrate, however, thata high percentage of students need to gain more experience and skill in providing appropriateevidence of their reading comprehension. Furthermore, the comparatively high non-response ratefor several open-ended items relying extensively on students' ability to link reading material withprior knowledge/experience also suggests that many students require guidance in developing theirunderstanding of the interrelationship between reading and the real world.

A major concern identified in the assessment findings is that students lack sufficient experienceand skill in handling a wide range of questions. Many students had considerable difficulty withquestions that were worded using complex sentence structure (items 24, E). Furthermore,students had difficulty responding to questions demanding higher-level literal comprehensionskills as well as to questions requiring higher-level thinking skills such as inferring, synthesizingand evaluating. Throughout the assessment many students rarely went beyond the literal level.


128

The observation that students' inferential and critical-reflective skills may be less well developedthan their literal comprehension skills is most clearly evident in a comparison of the results forthe items relating to text presented in tabular form. Whereas most students were able to read theexplicitly stated statistical information with apparent ease, a high percentage had difficultymanipulating and interpreting the data, skills which may best be developed through interactivelearning experiences.

Students also had considerable difficulty with some of the assessment items requiring aninterpretation of poetry. As the structure of poetry is so variable, it is essential that students havea range of strategies and processes with which to approach poetry independently. Discussion andother interactive experiences may be essential means of developing independent processing skillsrelating to poetry.

A review of the test results further reveals that many students are insufficiently aware of thevariety of reading strategies that are available to them and/or that are appropriate for varioustypes of texts; consequently, they do not make the conscious choices required to read effectively.In general, students appear to be more competent at and/or experienced in dealing with narrativetext than they are dealing with other types of reading materials. There are clear indications thatmany students do not know how to approach and process various types of expository text.Certainly, many students appear to have difficulty handling different formats of this text, whichraises the question of whether students are given appropriate experiences to help themdifferentiate between various types of exposition. Clearly, as literacy involves comprehensionof all types of text, the recognition and use of the thinking and metacognitive strategies involvedin the reading process need to be taught.


The teacher survey and the student reading survey were included in the 1992 ReadingAssessment to give both teachers and students an opportunity to express their views on theimportance and implementation of various aspects of reading in the English Language Artsprogram. In many respects, the teachers' reports of classroom practices may well be moreinformed and realistic than the students' accounts. Nevertheless, what students perceive to behappening merits serious consideration. Ultimately, both the teachers' and students' responses,and the apparent inconsistencies between them, must be viewed in the light of students'performance on the Reading Assessment and the English Language Arts curriculum guidelines.

The reading survey findings support the test results which suggest that many students havedifficulty interpreting and evaluating poetry, exposition and statistical information on their ownand that they may require interactive learning experience to develop and strengthen the abilityto process various types of text at an inferential or critical-reflective level. For example, thesurvey data indicating that less than two-fifths of the students read maps, charts and graphs, andapproximately a third or fewer read non-fiction and poetry outside of school may reflect andcontribute to students' difficulty in these areas.


129

A consistent message emerging from the reading survey results is that students have inadequateexposure to interactive learning experiences that allow for the kind of open-ended responses. thatenable them to develop and strengthen their inferential and critical-reflective thinking skills.According to the survey data, less than a third of the students "often" participate in activitiessuch as oral reading, reading to prepare for oral discussion or oral reports, and shared reading(pairs, literature circles), and under a third are given daily or weekly opportunities to work inpairs or small groups for reading activities. The lack of emphasis on shared reading experiencesreported by a substantial majority of students is somewhat inconsistent with the teacher surveydata indicating that nearly all teachers create daily or weekly opportunities for small-group workfor discussion, sharing or assignment completion. It may be argued that the teachers' perceptionslikely correspond more closely with actual classroom practices than the students' perceptions;however, students' performance on the Reading Assessment reflects a need for the continued useof or more extensive/appropriate use of interactive learning experiences. The seemingdiscrepancy in the teacher and student survey results, combined with student performance on thetest, suggests that more interactive activities should be encouraged in instructional situations.

The apparent scarcity of interactive reading experiences in many classrooms is inconsistent withthe English Language Arts curriculum which emphasizes the importance of cooperative andcollaborative learning experiences. In some cases, the omission of interactive reading activitiesmay well be a reflection of imposed time restrictions. It is crucial that time allotmentsaccommodate experiences that will promote rather than curtail the attainment of readingobjectives such as the development of interpretive and critical-reflective comprehension. Toallow some interactive experiences to happen, there needs to be flexibility both in the waytimetables are structured and in the way the time available is used. Some experiences may wellrequire more than a single period. Clearly, adequate time allotment is an essential factor in thedevelopment of higher-level thinking skills.

Both the student and teacher survey results suggest that the curriculum objective of exploringa wide variety of reading material in the English Language Arts program is pursued or realizedin the majority of classrooms. There is also evidence that further efforts may need to be madein attaining the appropriate balance of reading materials. In estimating the frequency with whichvarious types of texts are read in school, students reported reading narrative text with thegreatest frequency, whereas teachers claimed to make the most frequent use of exposition in thereading/English Language Arts program. The teacher survey results regarding the extensive useof expository text are somewhat surprising, given that the test results indicate students havegreater difficulty processing expository materials than they do processing other types of text. Itis possible that while teachers may be using informational literature in their teaching, they maynot be teaching strategies for content-area reading.

The student test and survey results reveal that students need greater skill in applying appropriatestrategies for different types of text (particularly various types of expository text), as well asgreater conscious awareness of the use of reading strategies. In view of these findings, theteachers' seemingly contradictory responses to survey questions inquiring about readingstrategies are of major concern. Although just over three-fifths of the teachers emphasized the


147

130

value of "student understanding and use of specific strategies for reading different types ofmaterials," little more than a quarter emphasized the importance of "strategy evaluation." Inrating their knowledge of various areas of reading instruction emphasized in the curriculum, justover three-fifths of the teachers reported a partial understanding or lack of understanding of "theteaching of reading strategies." Nearly all registered a need for professional development on thetopic of "strategies for specific types of text and reading processes including content areareading strategies." These apparent discrepancies give a strong message that teachers needassistance in integrating educational principles with teaching practices. Schools/divisions willneed to examine their own needs in this area.

The student reading survey data suggest that many teachers are not meeting the balance of goalsand objectives specified in the curriculum guidelines. There appears to be an imbalance ofteacher-directed and student-directed (self-directed) behaviour. Judging from the students'perceptions recorded in the survey, teachers are providing too much direction in areas wherethere should be a great deal of student choice and negotiation; for example, teachers areregularly choosing reading materials and supplying students with questions to answer whilereading. Conversely, teachers are providing insufficient direction in the use of strategies whichhelp students to: process reading independently, make choices, develop inferential andcritical-reflective thinking skills, move towards self-direction, and take ownership of learning.

Overall, it appears that students need more guidance and more experience in the use of readingstrategies which are essential to handling the myriad of reading materials to which they areexposed in daily life. Because the recognition and effective use of reading strategies are a keyto independence, teachers should concentrate on providing opportunities that will help studentsunderstand the thinking and metacognitive strategies involved in the reading process andconsciously adapt and vary the use of these strategies according to the demands of the textand/or reading situation.


Careful analysis of the grade 8 Reading Assessment results has led to the followingrecommendations related to curriculum and professional development. These recommendationsare expected to form the basis for provincial and divisional action plans designed to improvereading instruction in Middle Years.

It is hoped that all English Language Arts teachers will be involved in this process. Moreover,since the role of administrators as curriculum leaders is crucial to effective change, curriculumleaders are expected to support teachers in the implementation of the recommendations whichfollow. The group or groups targeted by each recommendation is/are identified after eachrecommendation.


S

131

LEGEI

T TeachersS SchoolsD School



F = Faculties of

I. CURRICULUM Education

A. Development


1. Manitoba Education and Training review existing anddeveloping curriculum documents in the light of educators'concerns related to length and readability.

B. Implementation



a. Curriculum leaders ensure that teachers have access toEnglish Language Arts: Overview K-12 (1988),English Language Arts: Middle Years (1982) andMiddle Years Source Book (1984).

2. Student Reading Materials

To ensure the use of a wide variety of appropriate student readingmaterials, it is recommended that:

a. teachers continue to use a wide variety of readingmaterials in instruction;

b. teachers be actively involved in the selection of EnglishLanguage Arts resource materials for both the classroomand library;

F3

M

S, D, F

T

T

Reading Final Report, French Immers' 'n Program

132

c. students be given frequent opportunities to select from awide variety of reading materials;

d. students be taught to choose reading materials selectivelyand to read them critically;

e. school divisions write and implement their own materialsselection policies, with input from teachers, based on themodel provided by Manitoba Education and Training.

3. Instruction

To ensure continued improvement in students' reading achieve-ment, especially related to interpretive and critical-reflectiveobjectives, it is recommended that:

a. teachers make regular use of current curriculumdocuments in planning, delivering and assessing dailyinstruction;

b. classroom instruction include frequent interactive learningexperiences through which students can enhance theirdiscussion and thinking skills;

c. administrators ensure the availability of one or two doubleperiods necessary to allow for interactive learningexperiences;

LEGEND

T = TeachersS SchoolsD a School



F a Faculties ofEducation

T, S

T

T, S, D, M

T

T

d. students be encouraged to discuss reading both in andbeyond the classroom; T, S

e. students be given appropriate opportunities to practicereading, manipulating, interpreting and drawingconclusions from statistical data;

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 13(1

T

S

133

T = TeachersS = SchootsD = School



F = Faculties ofEducation

f. students be taught how to work with a wide range ofquestion types using complex sentence structures;

g. students be taught how to elaborate and support theirresponses to open-ended questions;

h. the teaching of vocabulary emphasize the use of context-ual clues to derive implicit meaning from text;

i. students be taught to recognize, articulate and useappropriate strategies for processing different types oftext: exposition, poetry, narration, and tabular andstatistical information;

j. students be taught to develop connections between readingmaterial and actual experiences.



a. curriculum leaders provide more opportunities forteachers to learn more about strategy evaluation; S, D, M, F

b. curriculum leaders provide teachers with the opportunitiesand supports needed to acquire a variety of evaluationstrategies and resources consistent with the goals andobjectives of the curriculum; S, D, M, F

c. teachers be encouraged and supported in their use ofchanging evaluation procedures, tools and approaches. S, D, M, F


X51

134

LEDUC

T = TeachersS = SchoolsD = School

DivisionsN Manitoba

Education andtraining

F * Faculties ofEducation


Because support for teachers is critical in implementing many of theabove recommendations, it is recommended that:

a. teachers be actively involved in the selection ofprofessional literature for the school and school division;Manitoba Education and Training encourage teachers torecommend professional literature to the EnglishLanguage Arts consultant for inclusion in the InstructionalResources collection and for listing in the Manitoba TextBook Bureau catalogue; T, S, D, M

b. teachers be actively involved in the selection of topics forprofessional development sessions to reflect their needsfor practical as well as theoretical professionaldevelopment topics; T, S, D, M

c. administrators ensure that the professional developmentneeds of individual English Language Arts teachers(particularly those who are inexperienced) are met; S, D

d. universities and Manitoba Education and Trainingre-examine their role in ongoing updating of the skills ofEnglish Language Arts teachers in the field. M, F

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program r o

GRADE 11


In this issue find out...

Sap talks tosmarten on thebus

why ''rogelher'sBetter"

yam you tit inthe culturalmosaic

NMI one womanis doing to nom balunfair generali-zations

JOURNAL OF HUMANINTERACTION

betWhet 1 Want lo Be When I Grow Up . . . 2

Martim Moab

Cold bus Ride . . . ....... 9Gino Sorestal

her Gm.* Pt01[0.11X01 10

DOM( (being

Multicaltural Canada 11

Fan Moons and White Hen 13

Sow P. Harrod, M D.

Human relationships and theexperiences and attitudes wegain from them pervade ourlives. Think about any aspectof your life - school,

athletics, work, social.community or volunteergroups. Interaction betweenpeople is essential for thecontinuing existence of anyone of these facets of oursociety. When people come

together, however, there isalso the potential forpreviously held perceptionsand misconceptions to bechallenged. As you read theselections in this journal,think about your ownopinions and attitudes. Dothe selections reflect the kindsof experiences and attitudesyou see around you?

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Schools

[53

135

CHAPTER 8


INTRODUCTION




The specified reading objectives were assessed in relation to the following four types of text:

Narration: Martha Brooks, "What I Want to Be When I Grow Up" (short story)Poetry: Glen Sorestad, "Cold Bus Ride"

Debbie Ebeling, "Peer Group Prosecution"Exposition: Suzanne P. Harwood, "Full Moons and White Men" (opinion article)Table and Charts: "Multicultural Canada"

Each focusing on an aspect of human interaction, these thematically linked reading selectionswere reproduced in a one-time edition of Journal of Human Interaction. The focusing questionspresented at the start of the assessment were intended to encourage and help students to drawon their prior knowledge and experience regarding the chosen theme.


In the Student Question Booklet the test items were grouped according to the specific text towhich they were directed rather than the objectives being assessed. However, the test resultsreported below are presented by subtest, followed by reading survey data. The numberspresented may not always total 100% because of rounding-off or because the non-response rateis not included. A frequency distribution of responses to each assessment item was provided inthe Preliminary Report.


136


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 1-10

Students were given a general introduction to the assessment and brief introductory notes to eachpart of the assessment to assist them in preparing for the reading activities to follow. In addition,they were presented with an introductory set of ten focusing statements directing their attentionto the reading tasks ahead. In responding to these statements, students were required to draw ontheir prior knowledge and experience regarding the theme of human interaction.

The response rate for this section was remarkably high: over 99% of the assessment participantsresponded to each of the ten focusing statements (items 1-10). These results strongly suggestthat most students were beginning to think about and attempting to gain access to priorknowledge regarding the issues addressed in the assessment prior to the actual assessment,thereby fulfilling the intent of the focusing questions.

MEANING VOCABULARY





Of the six items assessing the Meaning Vocabulary objective, four related to the expositoryarticle and one each to the narrative and table/charts. All six items were presented in amultiple-choice format, with four possible response options. In five of the items students werereferred to a specific paragraph in a reading selection and asked to identify the correct meaningof a word based on the context in which it appeared. The item relating to the table/charts askedstudents to choose the correct word describing information obtainable from an interpretation ofstatistical data.

The Meaning Vocabulary subtest was intended to measure whether students could recognize andderive meaning from words in context, rather than in isolation. In order to select the correctresponse, students either had to recall the meaning of a word or observe various explicit orimplicit contextual clues in a careful reading of the relevant material. Correct definitions couldbe arrived at through one or a combination of the following means: identifying definitionssupplied directly (e.g., paraphrased) or implicitly in the text; recognizing and interpretingstructural or stylistic techniques to deduce or infer meaning; and understanding the perspective,emphasis or meaning of the text.


137

When reviewing the results for the Meaning Vocabulary subtest it is crucial to consider not onlythe percentage of correct responses, but also the objectives assessed and the items used to assessthe objectives.

RESULTS

As shown in Table 64 below, the mean performance on the Meaning Vocabulary subtest was68.39%. The percentage of correct responses for the individual Meaning Vocabulary itemsvaried considerably, ranging from 40.2% to 96.4% (see Table 65 below).

TABLE 64


Subtest Total MarksPer Subtest

MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score


TABLE 65

MEANING VOCABULARYMULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS


Item Type ofText

Word MeaningPercentageof Student

Responses Correct

17 Narration dinosaur Metaphoric 65.1%32 Table/Charts immigration Explicit 86.037 Exposition tachycardia Explicit 96.442 Exposition homogeneity Implicit 47.543 Exposition anomaly Implicit 75.246 Exposition incredulity Experiential 40.2

1 r,Jr


138

The results for the individual vocabulary items point to the complexity of the context rather thanto the difficulty of particular words. For example, without considering context, one would expecta technical medical word such as "tachycardia" to pose much greater difficulty for students thanthe word "dinosaur," which is undoubtedly familiar to students. Responses show quite theopposite, however: whereas virtually all students chose the correct definition of the term"tachycardia," for which a paraphrased definition is given in the expository article (item 37),just under two-thirds chose the correct definition of the word "dinosaur," which is used todescribe one of the characters in the short story, thus requiring a translation of the word intometaphoric use (item 17). For the latter item, students were required to disregard the literaldefinition of the word "dinosaur" ("a very large reptile," "an extinct being") along with thedescription of the character as "the old lady," as well as the most predictable figurativedefinition ("an old fashioned person"), in favour of the correct context-based definition ("adisagreeable person"). The last definition was the only one that was defensible on the basis ofthe narrative. With the exception of the word "dinosaur," all the words on this subtest wereused literally within their respective contexts.

The words "anomaly" (item 43) and "homogeneity" (item 42) were used in the same paragraphwithin the expository article. Clues to the meaning of these words were available through closeobservation of structural or stylistic techniques, such as the use of antithetical statements and theuse of antonyms. Three-quarters of the students selected the contextually appropriate definitionof the word "anomaly." In contrast, under half the students selected the correct definition ofthe word "homogeneity." A partial explanation of why over a quarter (27.2%) of the studentschose "normality" and over a fifth (21.0%) chose "differences" as the definition of"homogeneity" may be that the author uses the words "normal" and "different" in the samecontext.

The vocabulary item causing difficulty for the greatest proportion of students was the word"incredulity," correctly defined by approximately two-fifths of the students (item 46). Sinceneither explicit nor implicit definitions were provided within the text, students were required toarrive at the meaning of the word through an understanding/interpretation of the concepts orarguments presented in the text. Most of the student responses to this item were divided amongthree of the four response options, with two-fifths (40.2%) choosing the correct definition,"disbelief," nearly a quarter (23.4%) choosing "resentment," and close to a third (30.6%)choosing "disappointment."

A somewhat different format was used for the item relating to the table/charts (item 32). Insteadof being asked to select a definition of a given word, students were expected to choose theappropriate word describing the likely reason for an increase in the percentage of Canadiansfrom origins other than British or French between the years 1871 and 1971. Close to nine-tenthsof the students indicated correctly that the increase was due to "immigration." In formulatingtheir responses, students were expected to observe that the table,"Immigration by Place of Birth:Canada, 1945-1986," was a more applicable contextual clue than the two charts providingstatistics on the ethnic composition of Canada's population for 1871 and 1971 respectively.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program£0

S139

Interpretation

The results for the Meaning Vocabulary subtest indicate that students are relatively successfulat understanding words that are accompanied by explicit contextual clues and whose meaningis literal. However, students appear to have considerable difficulty understanding words whenthey are required to infer meaning from implicit contextual clues, including stylistic andstructural techniques, and/or from experience.


Ift,MS: Multiple-choice: 11, 14, 15, 27, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 45



The Literal Comprehension items applied to each of the four types of text: three to the narrative,one to the poetry, five to the table/charts, and one to the expository article. All ten items werepresented in the multiple-choice format.

The information needed to respond to these items was available directly from the text, althoughstudents were not referred to the precise location in which the relevant information could befound. Some of the responses required only a careful reading of one or a combination of specifictextual references. Other responses, however, required additional skills from various disciplines,including an understanding of literary terms or concepts (e.g., "point of view"), and the abilityto read table/charts, use several table/charts simultaneously, interpret numerical and/orvisual/spatial data, perform mathematical calculations and/or estimate proportions (relating tostatistics of Canada's population).

RESULTS

The mean performance on the Literal Comprehension subtest was 85.49%, as shown in Table66 below. Of the ten Literal Comprehension items included in the assessment, eight itemsreceived correct responses from more than three-quarters of all participants, and two itemsreceived correct responses from approximately two-thirds of the students (see Table 67 below).The percentage of correct responses ranged from 65.8% to 96.4%.


140

TABLE 66



MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent


LITERAL COMPREHENSION 10 8.55 85.49% 1.44

TABLE 67

LITERAL COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS


Item Type of TextPercentage

of Student Responses Correct

11 Narration 96.4%14 Narration 80.215 Narration 96.127 Poetry 94.030 Table/Charts 78.331 Table/Charts 65.833 Table/Charts 91.134 Table/Charts 90.435 Table/Charts 93.745 Exposition 68.9

An exceptionally high percentage of students chose correct responses to the items relating to theliterary reading selections. The poetry item, which required students to make a connectionbetween a specific reference to an individual's accent and his likely birthplace, received correctresponses from over nine-tenths of the students (item 27). With respect to the narrative, nearlyall students were able to identify that the story is told from the point of view of Andrew, thenarrator and principal character, as opposed to the author or one of the other characters (item11), and nearly all recognized Andrew's mother's cilooestion that he should think of riding thebus as research for his life's work as refe,-ring to a career in journalism, based on earlierreferences (item 15). Approximately four-;' ohs of the students identified Andrew's age, whichis specified near the beginning of the story in a context where the character is not mentioned(item 14). Whereas the text gives Andrew's 2ge in word form, the multiple-choice options werepresented numerically.


141

Three of the five items relating to the table/charts received correct responses from overnine-tenths of the students (items 33, 34, 35). In each case, the wording of thequestion/statement itself provided a clue for selecting the appropriate table or chart containingthe applicable information. Thus, in order to obtain the correct response, students were not onlyrequired to relate the information supplied in the question/statement in identifying the correcttable/charts, they were also expected to locate/identify the relevant data within the table/charts.

The item causing the greatest difficulty required but did not instruct students to use data fromtwo adjacent charts (item 31). Furthermore, the right response was dependent on correctMathematical calculations (or spatial estimations) in each chart separately and in the twocombined. That is, students were expected to calculate, using addition and/or subtraction, thepercentage of Canada's population of British or French origins in both the 1971 chart and the1871 chart (the latter providing the correct response for item 30, selected by a little overthree-quarters of the students), followed by a comparison of the two figures, the differencebetween them pointing to the correct statistic. Just under two-thirds of the students respondedaccurately.

The final item in the Literal Comprehension category applied to the expository article (item 45).Slightly more than two-thirds of the students indicated correctly that, according to the researchcited in the article, hospital admissions stay the same during a full moon. Over a fifth (22.4%)of the students chose an "increase" in admissions as their response, failing to note the explicitly

1111stated result of the medical study ("There was no increase in admissions during the full moon"),which is a point of reference for validating the author's major premise.

Interpretation

A review of the Literal Comprehension subtest results reveals that the great majority of grade11 students participating in the assessment can read and understand text at the literal level. Theirability to understand explicitly stated meaning was particularly strong with respect to thenarrative and poetry. Students also demonstrated strong literal comprehension skills in relationto the table/charts when they were expected to locate or identify statistical data. While fewstudents experienced difficulty reading the information in the table/charts, a comparatively highpercentage had difficulty extracting and using the data. Those items allowing for the use of arange of strategies to solve a problem appeared to present the greatest difficulty for students.

" Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

142


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 16, 18, 19, 21, 25, 26, 29, 36, 47Open-ended: F, I, J(i), K, M



The items on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest required students to draw inferences fromvarious texts. Specifically, students were expected to demonstrate ability to: synthesizeinformation from various parts of a text; recognize various writing techniques, including the useof imagery to draw comparisons; and elaborate on the textual material by drawing on personalknowledge and experience of human interaction. While the reading materials did not directlysupply the information needed to respond to the Interpretive Comprehension items, it invited oranticipated possible inferences.

The Interpretive Comprehension subtest, consisting of fourteen items, applied to each of the fourtypes of text, with four items relating to the narrative, six to the poetry, one to the table/charts,and three to the expository article. Nine of the items were presented in the multiple-choiceformat, and the remaining five required open-ended responses. Student responses to theopen-ended items were matched against the responses outlined in the Scoring Key.

RESULTS

As shown in Table 68 below, the mean performance on the Interpretive Comprehension subtestwas 59.68%, which takes into account the results for the nine multiple-choice and fiveopen-ended items presented in Tables 69 and 70 respectively.

161


I

143

TABLE 68



MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONMultiple-ChoiceOpen-Ended (Rubric)

TOTAL

95

14

6.002.35

8.36

66.69%47.06

59.58

1.480.94

2.01


Approximately two-thirds or more of the students provided cc erect responses to six of the ninemultiple-choice items, and well under half provided correct responses to three (see Table 69below). The percentage of correct responses for these items ranged from 35.2% to 93.5%.

TABLE 69

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS



Correct

16 Narration 80.0%18 Narration 87.519 Narration 44.621 Narration 93.525 Poetry 42.926 Poetry 79.329 Poetry 65.536 Table/Charts 71.847 Exposition 35.2

1 6 2Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

144

A large majority of students demonstrated effective interpretive comprehension in their responsesto three of the four multiple-choice items applying to the short story. Each of the itemsaddressed the motivation behind actions and attitudes revealed in the encounter between twofictional characters, Andrew and Earl, fellow bus passengers: four-fifths of the students correctlyinferred that the reason Earl causes a disturbance on the bus is that "He wants to be friendly"(item 16); virtually all understood that the reason for a change in how Andrew views Earl is that"Earl has become a person" (item 21); and close to nine-tenths correctly inferred that"concern" is at the heart of Earl's assistance of Andrew (item 18). In responding to theremaining question (item 19), under half the students correctly identified the reason why otherpassengers did not help Andrew when he was ill: "They did not notice"; 43.1% chose theincorrect alternative answer: "They did not care."

The multiple-choice items relating to the poetry selections required students to demonstrate theirinterpretive comprehension abilities by: selecting a phrase in which an image is used to draw acomparison, accomplished by just under four-fifths of the students (item 26); identifying thecause and effect relationship in a poem, achieved by two-thirds of the students (item 29); andchoosing an adjective describing the pervading mood of a poem, a task which slightly overtwo-fifths of the students carried out successfully (item 25). The results for the latter itemsuggest that the majority of students have difficulty interpreting tone.

This observation is reinforced by the results for the multiple-choice item applying to theexpository article (item 47). For this item, students were expected to choose the verb describingthe main purpose of the article, a task requiring an interpretation of tone. Just over a third ofthe students correctly inferred that the purpose of the satirical expository selection is to"persuade" its audience. The largest proportion of students (41.0%) indicated incorrectly thatthe purpose of the expository text is to "document."

In determining the correct response to the item concerning the table/charts, students wereexpected to identify which of the three texts contained the information needed to assess whichof four specified ethnic groups represented in the Canadian population would likely haveincreased the most in a given time period (item 36). Close to three-quarters of the students chosethe appropriate response.

Open-Ended Items

The results for the five open-ended Interpretive Comprehension items varied widely, as reflectedin Table 70 below. On average, a quarter (25.2%) of the open-ended responses were completeresponses, over two-fifths (43.8%) were partial responses, and a little more than a quarter(28.1%) were wrong. The response rate for these items ranged from 93.0% to 100%.


163

145

TABLE 70

INTERPRETIVE COMPREHENSIONOPEN-ENDED ITEMS


Rein Type of Text


Complete Partial Wrong NR

F Poetry 53.5% 42.4% 4.1% 0.0%I Poetry 12.8 69.4 17.3 0.5J (i) Poetry 22.2 54.9 22.4 0.5K Exposition 16.4 18.3 58.8 6.5M Exposition 21.0 34.0 38.1 7.0

The nature of the open-ended items was similar to that of the multiple-choice items, bothrequiring students to make inferences from the text. As with the multiple-choice items, theresults for the open-ended items varied according to the difficulty level of the specific tasksinvolved.

Over three-quarters of the students provided complete or partial responses to each of the threepoetry-related items. The item asking for a textually supported explanation of what motivatesthe silence between strangers sharing a bus seat received complete or partial response fromnearly all students (item F). The majority of students provided partial responses to the other twopoetry items, one of which expected students to identify or note the meaning of the pronounreference "it" (item I), and the other asked for an opinion on what is meant by the phrase,"Together's Better," suggesting a possible resolution to the conflict described in the poem (item

The largest proportion of responses to the two items pertaining to the expository article werejudged to be wrong on the basis of the scoring rubric provided. One of these items asked for anexplanation of the inferred connection between two popular beliefs, namely that they are equallyillogical. Close to three-fifths of the students offered wrong explanations and 6.5% did notrespond (item K). The second item challenged students to interpret an author's purpose in usinga particular strategy (i.e., substituting "white doctor" for an ethnic group in offensive jokes),which was to persuade her audience of the unreasonableness of judging people as a group (itemM). While a little over half offered complete or partial interpretations, close to two-fifths gavewrong interpretations, and 7.0% did not respond.


146

Interpretation

Student performance on the Interpretive Comprehension subtest varied widely from item to itemregardless of the response format required: for the multiple-choice items the percentage ofcorrect responses ranged from 35.2% to 93.5%; and for the open-ended items the percentageof complete and partial responses combined ranged from 34.7% to 95.9%. A vast majority ofstudents responded correctly to three of the four multiple-choice items focusing on the narrative.

The results for this subtest strongly suggest that students are struggling with reading tasksinvolving an interpretation of stylistic elements of text, particularly the use of tone (items 25,47). In general, students experienced the greatest difficulty interpreting the expository readingselection which was of a satirical nature, and which may have had the least connection with theirexperiential base. Each of the two open-ended items (items K, M) resulting in a high rate ofwrong responses was a highly demanding inferential reading task focusing on stylistic elementsof the expository text. The complexity of these tasks may have been magnified by inadequateexperience with expository text. However, the tasks were assessed in accordance with the grade11 instructional emphasis on exploring stylistic elements of a range of textual forms.


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 20, 28, 40, 41Open-ended: A(i & ii), B, C, D(i), D(ii), E, G, H, J(ii & iii), L, N (i & ii)



The Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest challenged students to reflect critically on theassigned literature, closely examining the content and pushing beyond the parameters of the textitself by exploring its wider implications. This task involved skills such as formulating opinions,proposing interpretations, making evaluations/analyses/judgements, observing nuances, drawingconclusions, and predicting or anticipating outcomes to hypothetical situations. The items on thissubtest demanded a critical-reflective consideration of the text, along with the thoughtfulapplication of prior knowledge about language and how it works.

Of the fifteen items comprising the Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest, seven applied tothe narrative, four to poetry and four to the expository article. The number of multiple-choiceand open-ended items was four and eleven respectively. All the open-ended responses werematched against the responses outlined in the Scoring Key.


147

4)RESULTS

The mean performance on the fifteen-item Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest was59.16% (see Table 71 below). Results for the four multiple-choice items and the elevenopen-ended items are presented in Tables 72 and 73 respectively.

TABLE 71



MeanRaw Score

MeanPercent

StandardDeviation

Raw Score

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSIONMultiple-ChoiceOpen-Ended (Rubric)

TOTAL

411

15

2.776.10

8.87

69.28%55.48

59.16

0.861.87

2.26


Table 72 below indicates that a large majority of students selected correct responses to all butone of the four multiple-choice items demanding a demonstration of critical-reflectivecomprehension.

TABLE 72

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSIONMULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS



Correct

20 Narration 37.3%28 Poetry 80.740 Exposition 92.841 Exposition 66.3

I 0 0L " 1 1 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

148

The one exception was the item relating to the short story, which required an assessment of theauthor's style in conveying her attitude toward the story's underlying issues (item 20). A littleover a third of the students correctly interpreted the narrative style as "playful" (presumablynoting stylistic techniques such as the use of humour to convey an overall tone); more than atenth (13.3%) interpreted the style as "peaceful," nearly a quarter (23.1%) described it as"sad," and a quarter (25.1%) described it as "serious." This discrepancy in the answers mayhave resulted from a confusion about the focus of the question, with many interpreting it asasking for a description of the issues themselves.

In another item requiring an assessment of style, students were asked to analyze the nature ofan author's proposed explanation of an incident described in her expository article (item 41).Approximately two-thirds of the students accurately assessed the explanation as an example of"opinion."

Students performed better in interpreting thematic elements of text than they did interpretingstylistic elements. For example, nearly all respondents correctly identified the statement bestrepresenting authorial point of view in the exposition (item 40), and just over four-fifthsaccurately identified the statement summarizing the main implication of a given poem (item 28).

Open-Ended Items

The response rate for the eleven open-ended items on the Critical-Reflective Comprehensionsubtest ranged from 95.4% to 100%. As shown in Table 73 below, by far the greatestproportion of the.open-ended responses reflected a partial understanding of the assigned tasksand/or texts. On average, nearly a third (32.1%) of the open-ended responses were scored ascomplete responses, close to half (46.8%) were rated as partial responses, and approximatelya fifth (19.6%) were judged to be wrong responses on the basis of the scoring rubric provided.


I

TABLE 73

CRITICAL-REFLECTIVE COMPREHENSIONOPEN-ENDED ITEMS


Item Type of Text


Complete Partial Wrong I NR

A (i & ii) Narration 29.4% 59.0% 11.6% 0.0%B Narration 32.3 62.4 5.1 0.2C Narration 22.2 65.1 12.0 0.7D (i) Narration 29.2 42.7 27.7 0.5D (ii) Narration 30.1 65.8 4.1 0.0E Narration 29.4 55.7 12.8 2.2G Poetry 55.9 21.2 18.3 4.6H Poetry 55.7 27.5 16.4 0.55 (ii & iii) Poetry 31.8 54.0 14.0 0.2L Exposition 15.2 28.2 53.3 3.4N (i & ii) Exposition 21.7 33.5 40.5 4.3

149

More than two-thirds of the students provided fully or partially satisfactory responses to eachof the six items relating to the short story, with the percentage of complete responses rangingfrom 22.2% to 32.3%, and the percentage of partial responses ranging from 42.7% to 65.8%.In only one instance were more than a quarter of the responses scored wrong. The tasks involvedin the six narrative-related items were as follows: two items required students to go beyond aliteral reading of the narrative by questioning the reliability or validity of the narrator'scomments and attitudes, on the basis of their understanding of the implications of his behaviourand indications of his biased or limited point of view (items A[i&ii], C); two items asked forinsightful explanations regarding the specified reactions of two primary characters to each other(items D[i] and D[ii]); one item requested an interpretation of the reaction of a group ofstrangers to an uncomfortable situation occurring on a bus, as communicated by their behaviour(item B); and one item sought a textually supported interpretation of the major issue or concernin the story (item E).

Numerous open-ended items on this subtest, including all three poetry-related items, involvedmaking comparisons and/or distinctions. One item called for an explanation of two contrastingstanzas in a single poem, a challenge which a small majority of the students met with completesuccess and another fifth with partial success (item G). Comparisons between two differentreading selections were also required. In one instance, students were asked to consider a scenarioin which a character from the short story is placed among characters in a poem and predict thelikely outcome, explaining the anticipated reactions on the basis of the text (item H). Over halfthe students received a complete score for their predictions, and over a quarter received a partialscore. For the final poetry-related item, which requested students to give textually supported

168


150

opinions or judgements regarding the comparative success of two different poems in expressinga similar idea, close to a third of the students provided complete responses and over half gavepartial responses (item J[ii & iii]).

One of the two items relating to the expository article also involved a comparison. Students wereasked to assess whether an idea expressed by one of the poets would correspond or be inagreement with the views expressed by the author of the article (item N[i & ii]). A little morethan half the responses to this item were judged to be complete or partial responses, andtwo-fifths were scored wrong. The other item regarding the exposition, which appears to havebeen the most complex item on this subtest, called for an interpretation of an argument impliedin a question posed by the author (item L). A small majority of students gave wronginterpretations. Both the expository items generated a much higher rate of wrong responses than

any of the open-ended items applying to literary texts. Still, the high rate of response isnoteworthy.

Interpretation

The overall performance on the Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest points to someencouraging developments in students' abilities to consider and evaluate the implications ofreading materials. The subtest data reflect a high rate of response not only for the fourmultiple-choice items but also for the eleven open-ended items, a finding which is particularlynoteworthy given the complexity of the tasks required. A further highlight is the high rate ofcomplete and partial responses generated for the narrative- and poetry-related open-ended items,which demonstrates that students were interacting with the literature at a critical-reflective level.However, the greatest proportion of the open-ended responses reflected a partial understandingof the assigned tasks and/or texts. Clearly, students need to develop their understanding more

fully.

With respect to the open-ended tasks, students had the greatest success in responding to thepoetry items (items G, H, J[ii & iii]) which required them to draw on prior knowledge/experience and make comparisons and/or distinctions between different parts of one readingselection or between different texts. These tasks required students to extend their subjectivepersonal response to a more distanced or objective personal response, a challenge which anaverage of over four-fifths of the students carried out with complete or partial success. Incontrast, the items requiring a more distanced personal response to the expository article resultedin an exceptionally high rate of wrong responses (items L, N[i & ii]).

An analysis of the results for the four multiple-choice items on this subtest indicates that students

are more proficient at evaluating thematic elements of text (items 28, 40) than they areevaluating stylistic elements (items 20, 41).

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 16.)

151


ITEMS: Multiple-choice: 12, 13, 22, 23, 24, 38, 39, 44, 48


Recognizing the use of, and interaction between, the thinking and meta-cognitive strategies involved in the reading process.

Adapting and varying the use of these strategies at a conscious levelaccording to the demands of the text and/or reading situation.

The assessment of reading strategies and process skills is a relatively new area of assessment inManitoba. Formally included for the first time in the 1992 Reading Assessment, this subtest wasintended to assess and extend student awareness and use/selection of various interactive strategiesinvolved in the reading process, as well as reinforce student awareness of the need to examinereading strategies and process skills at a conscious level.

The strategies selected for assessment were chosen largely on the basis of the specific textualmaterials included in the Reading Assessment. Since the list of reading strategies assessed wasneither comprehensive nor necessarily representative of the repertoire of strategies to whichstudents need to be, or are being, exposed, the results for this subtest may not be reflective ofthe full extent or range of students' abilities in the area. Given the innovative nature of thissubtest, the results need to be interpreted with some caution.

Of the nine items included on the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest, five pertainedto the narrative and four to the expository article. Since the multiple-choice format was used forall the items, students were required to select appropriate strategies from a given list of readingstrategies, but were not expected to propose strategies. This factor must also be taken intoconsideration in interpreting results.

RESULTS

The mean performance on the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest was 77.97% (seeTable 74 below). A large majority of students selected correct responses for each of the ninemultiple-choice items on the subtest, with the percentage of correct responses to the respectiveitems ranging from 64.6% to 92.3%. Overall, students performed almost equally well on thenarrative-related and exposition-related items. Table 75 below outlines the various types of taskson which students were assessed, along with the specific responses required for each item on thesubtest and the percentage of students selecting the correct response.

I ;'f)


152

TABLE 74

READING STRATEGIES AND PROCESS SKILLS SUBTEST MEANSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 11)

Subtest

TotalMarks Per

Subtest

MeanRawScore

MeanPercent


READING STRATEGIES AND PRDCESS SKILLS 9 7.02 77.97% 1 1.39


153

TABLE 75

READING STRATEGIES AND PROCESS SKILLSFrench Immersion Program (Grade 11)

ItemType of

Text Type of Task

Percentageof

ResponsesCorrect Correct Response

Students were assessed on theirability to:

In selecting the correct response,students demonstrated their ability to:

12 Narration recognize the organizationalstructure within a narrative;

70.4% identify chronological progression or"time" as the organizing feature of thespecified short story;

13 Narration show discrimination in choice ofreading strategy suitable for thetext and the reading task/purpose;

90.8 recognize that a good strategy for readingthe given story is "to read at acomfortable pace noting plot andcharacter development";

22 Narration identify the dominant narrativeelement around which the actiontakes place (e.g., plot, character,setting, atmosphere), and whichestablishes readers' expectations;

64.6 identify "character" as the mostimportant element of the selectednarrative;

23 Narration observe progression ordevelopment within a story;

66.0 observe the action/behaviour of aspecified character as the most effectivefactor in changing the narrator's opinionof that character;

24 Narration detect attitude or point of view asconveyed through tone;

91.1 recognize an example of a character's useof sarcasm to convey disapproval of theactions of another;

38 Exposition establish a useful approach orstrategy for determining themeaning of unfamiliar vocabulary;

92.3 appreciate the merit of using contextualclues to define the word "tachycardia" inthe expository article;

39 Exposition identify the genre and purpose ofa specified reading selection;

72.0 describe the expository article as anopinion essay;

44 Exposition assess the intent/inference of astatement/argument andunderstand its implications;

69.2 recognize statements from the expositoryarticle as examples of "generalization";

48 Exposition apply knowledge gained from onecontext to another.

85.3 identify "articles about stereotyping" asthe most helpful resource for evaluatingopinions presented in the expository text.


154

Interpretation

According to the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest results reported above, themajority of students have the ability to select appropriate reading strategies for particularsituations when given a choice of several strategies. In general, a slightly higher percentage ofstudents chose correct responses for items requiring an identification of strategies than for thoserequiring an application of strategies. Student performance on the items pertaining to thenarration was almost the same as on those focusing on the exposition. As students were notexpected to articulate strategies, their responses do not necessarily indicate extensive awarenessof the strategies involved in the reading process. Nonetheless, the selection of suitable strategiesfor given situations required some knowledge of the repertoire of strategies available. Althoughthe data are limited, they are encouraging.


ITEMS: 49-65, OS

The final component of the Reading Assessment consisted of a reading survey which addressedindividual reading interests as well as students' reading practices in and out of school. Thiscomponent of the assessment was included in the belief that all dimensions of a reader's life,whether they are the habits developed in school or at home, influence reading comprehension.Students were assured that there were no right or wrong responses to the survey items and wereencouraged to answer the questions aF honestly as possible based on their reading experiencesduring the 1991-92 school year.

In addition to asking students to assess their own reading skills and difficulties, the surveyinquired about students' choice of reading/materials and motivation for reading, time spentreading in and out of school, opportunities for shared and extended reading activities,teacher-facilitated use of reading strategies, and student use of reading strategies. The surveyresults are reported below.

Students' Self-Assessment As Readers

At the start of the survey, students were asked to assess their own competence as readers andidentify the area of reading causing the greatest difficulty for them. As shown in Table 76below, more than a quarter of the students surveyed considered themselves to be very goodreaders, over three-fifths were of the opinion that they were average readers, and just under atenth either thought they were poor readers or were not sure what kind of readers they were(item 49). Approximately two-fifths of the students indicated that no area of reading is difficultfor them (item 50), which exceeds the proportion of students rating themselves as very good


173

155

readers. The area of reading posing difficulty for the greatest proportion of students was"understanding the author's meaning," selected by over a third of the respondents, followed by"reading fast enough to finish as quickly as your classmates," selected by close to a quarter.Only a few students identified vocabulary as an area of difficulty.

TABLE 76




Response

49.

50.

In your opinion you are:

Which area of reading do youfind most difficult?

a)b)c)d)

a)b)c)

d)

a very good reader.an average reader.a poor reader.not sure.

Understanding the author's meaning.Reading the words in the selections.Reading fast enough to finish asquickly as your classmates.No area of reading is difficult.

27.2%62.96.52.4

33.32.2

23.140.2

Reading for Personal Interest/Enjoyment

According to the survey responses, nearly all students read for personal pleasure and interest(items 51, P, R, S). Survey results, however, indicate considerable variation in students' reasonsfor reading, their choice and source of reading material, their preferred reading context, thefrequency with which they read, and the amount of time spent reading for personal enjoyment.

When asked why they read for pleasure or personal interest (item S), the majority of studentsselected each of the following three reasons: "I really enjoy reading" (59.0%); "to find outmore about my hobbies or areas of interest" (51.1%); and "I just like to learn new things"(59.8%). A little over a third also cited "nothing better to do" (34.9%) as a reason for reading.Only 4.1% noted they "don't read for pleasure or personal interest."

Students were asked to indicate the frequency with which they read a specified list of readingmaterial for personal pleasure or interest, possible responses being "often," "sometimes," or"never" (item Q). According to their responses, students read a wide range of materials forpleasure or personal interest, the majority reading magazines, newspapers, and comics orcartoons with the greatest frequency. The majority of the students indicated they "often" or"sometimes" read all but one of the ten types Gf materials listed. However, approximately athird of the students reported "never" reading poetry/plays and "how-to" manuals, and over


156

half indicated they "never" read on-screen directions/computer manuals. The order ofpreference for, or usefulness of, the specified list of reading materials, based on the percentageof respondents who chose the category "often" and "sometimes" for the various types of text,is outlined in Table 77 below.

TABLE 77

MATERIALS READ FOR PLEASURE/PERSONAL INTERESTFrench Immersion Program (Grade 11)

Item Q Type of Reading Material

Frequency of Reading

Often +Sometimes Often Sometimes Never NR

(d) Magazines 94.2% 67.2% 27.0% 1.7% 4.1%(i) Newspapers 92.3 56.4 35.9 4.3 3.4(a) Novels or short stories 90.1 46.5 43.6 6.5 3.4(j) Schedules (e.g., bus, swimming

pool, TV, working hours) 88.0 44.6 43.4 8.2 3.9(c) Comics or cartoons 86.3 51.8 34.5 10.1 3.6(0 Song lyrics 78.6 41.7 36.9 18.1 3.4(e) Non-fiction (e.g., biography,

science articles, fashion) 74.9 25.3 49.6 21.7 3.4(b) Poetry or plays 64.8 14.2 50.6 31.8 3.4(h) "How-to" manuals (e.g.,

Nintendo, auto repair, cooking) 62.2 13.5 48.7 34.0 3.9(g) On-screen directions/computer

manuals 42.4 9.9 32.5 54.2 3.4

Over three-fifths of the students identified the following as applicable sources for obtainingmaterials read for personal interest/enjoyment: "school or class library," "public library,""buy them," and "exchange with friends or family" (item P). Nearly all students chose"home" as one place in which they read for personal pleasure/interest, close to a third chose"bus," "library" and "in class," and half chose "elsewhere" (item R). (See Table 78 belowfor responses to items P and R.)

I <5


157

TABLE 78

READING FOR PERSONAL PLEASURE:SOURCE OF MATERIALS AND PREFERRED READING LOCATION




Response

P. Where do you obtain your a) School or class library 61.4%reading materials for your b) Public library 64.1pleasure or personal interest c) Buy them 72.0reading? d)

e)Exchange with friends or familyDon't read for pleasure or personal

62.4

interest 3.9

R. Where do you read for a) Library 31.1pleasure or personal interest? b) In class 31.6

c) At home 92.0d) Bus 30.4e)f)

ElsewhereDon't read for pleasure or personal

50.1

interest 2.9

According to the survey results, the majority of students (52.5%) "seldom" take/find time toread for enjoyment in school, while a quarter (25.3%) do so "once a week or less," and a littleover a fifth (21.2%) do so from "two or three times a week" to "daily or almost daily" (item57). Overall, it appears students take and/or have little time to read for enjoyment in school.

The survey data further indicate that students feel they have few opportunities to choose whatthey will read in English Language Arts classes (item 60). Just over a fifth (21.2%) reportedbeing given the opportunity to choose their reading material "at least once a month" or more,the rest indicating they were given a choice "a few times a year" (41.4%) or "never" (37.3%).

Time Spent Reading

While most students read for personal pleasure or interest (items 51, S), they appear to spendunequal amounts of time doing so (see Table 79 below). Time spent reading for personalpleasure and interest, excluding school assignments, in the week preceding the assessment variedconsiderably among students, with about one-third spending two or more hours reading, overhalf spending from less than one hour to two hours, and a tenth spending no time reading (item51).

1 '7' I;


158

The survey results show a close correspondence between the amount of time spent reading forpersonal pleasure (item 51) and the time spent each week reading in English Language Arts bothin school (item 55) and out of school (item 56). In each context, the majority of studentsreported reading "between one and two hours" or "less than one hour" per week (see Table

79 below).

TABLE 79

AMOUNT OF TIME SPENT READING PER WEEKFrench Immersion Program (Grade 11)

MoreThan 3 2-3 1-2

LessThan 1

Item Purpose/Context Hours Hours Hours Hour None

51 Reading for personal pleasure/interest 19.5% 14.2% 31.1% 24.8% 10.4%

55 Reading in ELA in school 7.5 18.3 35.2 33.7 5.3

56 Reading for ELA out of school 11.3 18.3 37.8 25.8 6.7

Shared and Extended Reading Activities

Numerous survey questions asked students to indicate how often they have shared readingexperiences. According to survey responses, the frequency with which students talk to othersabout reading done for personal pleasure or interest varies somewhat according to their audience(items 52, 53, 54). As shown in Table 80 below, the frequency of discussion withclassmates/friends is similar to the frequency of discussion with adults, but considerably lowerwith teacher(s). Close to three-fifths of the students indicated they never or almost never talkto their teacher(s) about reading done for personal interest, over a quarter indicated the samewith respect to adults, and just over a fifth indicated the same with respect to friends/classmates.

I 7 7


159

TABLE 80

FREQUENCY OF DISCUSSION REGARDING PLEASURE READINGFrench Immersion Program (Grade 11)

Item AudienceDaily or

Almost Daily2 or 3 Times

a WeekOnce a Week

or Less

,Never or

Almost Never

525354

Friends/ClassmatesAdultTeacher(s)

12.8%13.72.2

28.0%22.99.2

36.9%33.529.4

21.9%29.258.3

Comparable responses were given to the item addressing jointicoliaborative reading activitiesamong students initiated by the English Language Arts teacher (item 63). As indicated in Table81 below, nearly a fifth of the students reported that their teacher seldom or never has themwork in pairs or small groups for reading activities, whereas approximately a third reportedbeing given the opportunity at least once a month, and close to half had the opportunity at leastonce a week or almost every class.

The frequency with which teachers encourage students to respond to their reading in the formof journal or log entries was also assessed (item 65). While almost half the students reportedsuch responses were called for only a few times a year or never, .... fifth were asked at leastmonthly, and close to a third were asked at least once a week or every class/almost every class(see Table 81 below).

A small majority of the survey respondents indicated that their English Language Arts teacherreads aloud to their class on a weekly to daily basis, and almost a quarter noted its occurrenceat least once a month; however, approximately a quarter of the students indicated their teacherreads to their class a few times a year or never (item 58) (see Table 81 below). Students werenot asked to report whether or how often they are asked to read aloud in class.

L 78


160

TABLE 81

FREQUENCY OF SHARED AND EXTENDED READING ACTIVITIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 11)

Daily or At Least At Least Seldom/A FewThe English Language Arts Almost Once a Once a Times a Year

Item Teacher: Daily Week Month or Never

5863

reads aloud to class.has students work in pairs/small

21.0% 30.4% 22.9% 25.8%

65

groups for reading activities.asks students to respond in

17.3 30.8 32.8 19.0

journal /log to reading. 14.7 17.1 20.2 47.9

Teacher-Facilitated Use of Reading Strategies

Several survey items focused on the frequency with which teachers facilitate student use ofreading strategies before, during and after reading. According to the student responses presentedin Table 82 below, English Language Arts teachers most commonly provide directed readingstrategies by:

giving students a list of questions or prompts to respond to as they read (approximatelythree-fifths of the students reported receiving this type of direction from half to almost allthe time they readitem 59);

helping students organize their information after they read (a small majority reportedreceiving this form of assistance from half to almost all the time they read, although nearlya third indicated they are assisted in this way a few times a year or neveritem 62).

Two additional types of direction were reportedly practiced by English Language Arts teachers,but with considerably less frequency:

suggesting reading strategies for students to use for a particular reading task (over two-fifthsof the students reported receiving such suggestions a few times a year or neveritem 60;

stating a purpose or asking students to state a purpose for reading before students begin toread (almost half the students noted that this practice seldom or never occursitem 64).


17

161

TABLE 82

TEACHER-FACILITATED USE OF READING STRATEGIESIN ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS CLASSES


ItemThe English Language Arts

Teacher:AlmostAlways

Half theTime or

More

Less ThanHalf the

Time

Seldom onFew Times

a Year Never

59 gives questions/prompts for usewhile reading. 37.6% 22.7% 15.7% 14.9% 9.2%

61 suggests reading strategies forparticular task. 14.2 27.7 14.9 23.1 20.0

62 helps organize information afterreading. 30.1 22.9 16.6 15.9 14.5

64 states/asks for reading purposebefore reading. 14.0 20.0 21.0 26.3 18.8

Student Use of Reading Strategies

One survey item requested students to rate a list of ten strategies as to frequency of use in theirown reading, choosing the categories "frequently," "rarely" or "N/A (not applicable)," thelatter category indicating nonuse (item 0). The responses to this item (reported in Table 83below) reveal that almost three-quarters of the students frequently "determine [the meaning of]unknown words by context," under a fifth frequently "look up unknown words in thedictionary," slightly over a tenth often "sound out words," and less than a tenth frequently"break words into syllables." Almost nine-tenths of the students professed to "Imow mastwords by sight."

Of the other reading strategies listed, only two were identified by the majority of students asbeing in frequent use: over three-quarters of the students reported that they frequently "use[their] knowledge of the topic to help [them] interpret and evaluate ideas," while a fifth rarelyor never use this strategy; and just over half the students noted they frequently "vary [their]reading rate according to the content of the material and [their] purpose for reading," whilealmost half rarely or never vary their reading rate. Survey responses further reveal that a smallmajority of students rarely or never "use the author's organization to aid [their] understandingand remembering," and more than three-quarters rarely or never "skim over the material beforereading to get a general idea of the content" or "pose questions that [they] think will beanswered in the material before [they] begin reading."

c. 11


162

TABLE 83

STUDENT USE OF READING STRATEGIESFrench Immersion Program (Grade 11)

Item 0 Type of Reading Strategy

Frequency of Use

Frequently Rarely 1 N/A NR

(a) Sound out words. 11.8% 63.4 22.9% 1.9%(b) Break words into syllables. 8.2 61.4 28.2 1.9(c) Determine unknown words by context. 74.0 22.2 1.7 2.2(d) Know most words by sight. 88.7 7.0 2.2 2.2(e) Look up unknown words in the dictionary. 16.9 66.7 14.5 1.9(1) Use the author's organization to aid

understanding and remembering. 44.1 37.1 16.1 2.7(g) Use knowledge of the topic to help interpret

and evaluate ideas. 77.1 16.4 4.1 2.4(h) Skim over the material before reading to get a

geheral idea of the content. 19.3 54.9 23.9 1.9(i) Pose questions that may be answered in the

material before beginning to read. 13.3 52.5 32.3 1.9(j) Vary reading rate according to the content of

the material and the purpose for reading. 51.1 33.7 13.0 2.2


CHAPTER 9


INTRODUCTION

163

The Teacher Questionnaire accompanying the grade 11 Reading Assessment was sent to a totalof 318 teachers instructing English Language Arts in English language schools,Franco-Manitoban schools and in the French Immersion program, and was completed by 247teachers. The return rate was 77.7%. It was possible to survey teachers from all three clientgroups together at this level because there is one common curriculum.



In the final section of the survey, teachers were invited to make any additional commentsregarding the teaching of reading at the grade 11 level, as well as on the strengths andweaknesses of the grade 11 Reading Assessment.

When reviewing the following report of the teacher survey results, it is important to keep inmind that the statistics represent the responses of teachers coming from schools of varying sizes,which will affect factors such as class size, availability of resources and support services, andso on. Unless specified otherwise, the percentage figures take into account all 247 teacherscompleting the questionnaire. Where reported cumulative percentages do not total 100%, it isdue to rounding-off or to omission of the non-response rates. Non-respondents are excluded fromthe mean and median figures reported.

1 S


164


Teaching Experience (Items I[A, B])

The teachers opting to participate in the survey represent a highly experienced group of teachers.Three-quarters of the teachers reported having more than ten years of teaching experience at thetime of the Reading Assessment, the median number of years of teaching experience being 18years. Just over half the teachers had more than ten years of experience teaching Senior YearsEnglish Language Arts (the median being 11 years), suggesting that some English Language Artsteachers have previously taught other curricula and/or have spent time teaching at other levels.


Teachers were asked to specify how many three-credit courses (half courses) they have takenin total, and in the last five years in the following areas: English (Arts Faculty); the teaching ofEnglish Language Arts (Education Faculty); and the teaching of reading (Education Faculty).The non-response rate for these survey questions was remarkably high: between a quarter anda little over a third of the teachers did not provide information on the total number of coursestaken, and a little over half did not provide information on the number of courses taken in thelast five years.

The survey data on the total number of three-credit courses taken indicate the following: 6.9%

of the teachers had taken no courses in English, 39.7% had taken from one to six courses, and27.1% had taken seven or more (26.3% did not respond); 7.3% had taken no courses in theteaching of English Language Arts, 42.1% had taken one to three courses, and 24.7% had takenfour or more (25.9% did not respond); and 25.9% had taken no courses in the teaching ofreading, 20.6% had taken one course, and 17.4% had taken two or more courses (36% did notrespond).

Thus, in total, survey respondents had taken a median of 6.0 three-credit courses in English, 2.0

three-credit courses in the teaching of English Language Arts, and 1.0 three-credit course in theteaching of reading. The median number of courses taken in the past five years in any of thethree areas was 0.0. It is possible that some respondents misread the survey question and,instead of providing information on the number of three-credit courses taken, they specified thenumber of full courses taken.


Teachers were asked to rate their own understanding of various areas of reading instruction....urrently emphasized in the curriculum, although they were not asked to specify how theyobtained their knowledge (that is, whether through academic course work, professional


165

development sessions, or their own reading). As indicated in Table 84 below, close tothree-quarters of the teachers professed to have a thorough understanding of reading/writingportfolios and content area reading, and a small majority professed to have a thoroughunderstanding of reader response, integrated language instruction, and bulk reading. The areasleast well understood were: reading cuing systems, developmental reading, and the teaching ofreading strategies. Significantly, from just under a quarter to just over half of the teachersconsidered themselves to have only a partial understanding of every major area of readinginstruction listed. In addition, approximately one-tenth to three-tenths claimed not to understandfour of the areas.

TABLE 84


(Grade 11)


UnderstandWell

UnderstandPartly

Do NotUnderstand NR

Reading/writing portfolios 72.5% 24.3% 1.6% 1.6%Content area reading 72.1 22.3 4.0 1.6Reader response 57.5 31.2 9.3 2.0Integrated language instruction 55.9 37.7 4.9 1.6Bulk reading 50.6 34.4 13.0 2.0Teaching of reading strategies 38.5 50.6 7.3 3.6Developmental reading 34.4 51.8 11.7 2.0Reading cuing systems 23.9 44.9 29.1 2.0


Although few teachers reported having taken courses in the teaching of res!mg or the teachingof English Language Arts in the last five years, nearly all claimed to have had someopportunities for professional development in these areas during that time. Of the teachers withfive or more years of experience teaching Senior Years English Language Arts (representing76.1% of all survey participants), 64.9% reported having had ten or more hours of professionaldevelopment in reading/English Language Arts available to them in the past five years, 16.0%

had five to nine hours, 9.6% had or to four hours, 6.4% had none (3.2% did not respond). Bycomparison, 57.4% reported having taken ten or more hours of professional development inthese areas during the past five years, 12.8% had taken five to nine hours, 4.8% had taken oneto four hours, and 7.4% had not taken any (17.6% did not respond). Survey respondentsreported taking a median of ten hours of professional development in reading/English LanguageArts during the past five-year period. It is noteworthy that a significant proportion of teacherschose not to provide information on their participation in professional development within thelast five years, a period of time during which major shifts in curriculum directions haveoccurred.


166

In assessing the usefulness of the professional development sessions they attended within the lastfive years, almost all teachers rated the sessions either as "very useful" (38.1%) or as"somewhat useful" (40.5%), and a small percentage rated the sessions as "extremely useful"(6.9%) or "not useful" (4.5%). The remainder indicated the question was not applicable (7.3%)

or did not respond (2.8%).

Teachers were also given an opportunity to rate their need for professional development on sevendifferent topics. Significantly, over three-quarters of the teachers perceived a need forprofessional development on each topic, with over a quarter registering a "great need" for eachtopic. The various topics are listed in Table 85 below according to the percentage of teachersregistering "great" or "some" need for professional development in the respective areas.

TABLE 85

TEACHER RATING OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TOPICS(Grade II)

Professional Development TopicsGreat + Some

NeedGreatNeed

SomeNeed

NoNeed NR

Evaluation techniques for reading 93.1% 42.9% 50.2% 4.9% 2.0%

Strategies for specific types of text andreading processes including content areareading methods 90.3 42.9 47.4 6.9 2.8

Teaching approaches (e.g., grouping,paired learning) 88.2 36.0 52.2 10.1 1.6

Basic reading theory 87.4 28.3 59.1 9.7 2.8

Use of the curriculum documents forgrade 11 English Language Arts 83.8 31.6 52.2 13.0 3.2

Available reading materials 83.0 32.0 51.0 13.8 3.2

General philosophy of the EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum 77.3 32.4 44.9 19.8 2.8

The survey responses indicate that there is considerable, need for professional development ontopics such as the philosophy and content of the English Language Arts curriculum, availabilityof reading materials, and basic reading theory; however, teachers feel the greatest need forprofessional development in areas relating to reading strategies, teaching approaches andevaluation techniques for reading. These needs were reiterated in the open-ended responses ofthe teachers (9.7%) who suggested additional topics for professional development.


167


Teachers were also asked to report on the availability and use of professional literature and itsinfluence on their current teaching practice. According to the survey responses, the majority ofschools (59.9%) make professional reading materials available to teachers weekly to monthly,a quarter (24.3%) provide them quarterly, and a tenth (10.1%) never provide them (5.7% didnot respond). The rate at which materials are made available to teachers corresponds closely tothe frequency with which teachers read articles from professional journals or books aboutreading/language arts ("weekly" or "monthly" 58.3%, "quarterly" 33.2%, "never" 6.9%).Although over a tenth (11.7%) of the teachers chose not to comment on the extent to whichresearch in reading/language arts influences their classroom teaching, four-fifths noted varyingdegrees of influence ("weekly" 21.9%, "monthly" 21.1%, "quarterly" 37.2%, "never"8.1%).

A substantial majority of teachers indicated that the contributions/support of colleagues andadministrators with respect to promoting professional literature about reading/language arts issporadic or absent altogether: three-fifths noted that colleagues or administrators refer to suchmaterials quarterly (35.6%) or never (25.1%); and nearly two-thirds noted that administratorsencourage such reading either quarterly (26.7%) or never (37.7%). Fewer than a third of theteachers claimed to receive these two forms of professional support weekly or monthly.

Change in Teaching Practice (Items I[J, K])

Nearly all teachers (85.8%) observed changes in their teaching practice in reading/language artsover the past five years. The majority of teachers attributed these changes to professionaldevelopment sessions or activities (62.8%) and to professional reading or study (58.7%);two-fifths or more noted the influence of colleagues' suggestions (46.2%) and curriculum guides(40.1%); and just over a quarter (28.7%) credited changes to divisional/schoolpolicy/philosophy. A substantial proportion of teachers (15.4%) also specified other factorsinfluencing changes in their teaching practice, the vast majority of which centered on ongoingpersonal initiative/development and personal experience, knowledge, and observations of thestudents' abilities, needs and suggestions. Other influential factors included assistance fromspecialists such as Manitoba Education and Training consultants, special courses/trainingopportunities, and changes in job assignment.


At the conclusion of the "Teacher Training and Professional Development" section of thesurvey, teachers were asked to rate themselves as to their qualifications to teach grade 11English Language Arts, taking into account their university education, professional developmentand past experience. A small majority of the teachers (57.5%) rated themselves as highlyqualified, and over a third (37.2%) felt they were qualified (2.0% felt they were inadequatelyqualified, and 3.2% did not respond).


t 8 O

168

SCHOOL ORGANIZATION

The second section of the Teacher Questionnaire focused on the organization of the EnglishLanguage Arts program in schools, the influence teachers have in making decisions regardingEnglish Language Arts programming, and the availability of support services for EnglishLanguage Arts teachers.

Organization of English Language Arts Program (Items II[A, B, C, D, E, F, G])

Of the teachers participating in the survey, four-fifths (78.9%) noted they were teaching EnglishLanguage Arts by choice, the remainder indicating they were doing so by negotiated choice(5.3%) or by assignment (11.7%), or did not respond (4.0%).

At the time the survey was conducted, almost three-fifths (57.1%) of the survey participantswere teaching grade 11 English Language Arts in a semestered system and just over two-fifths(41.3%) were teaching in a non-semestered system. As shown in Table 86 below, surveyrespondents working within a semestered system reported that during the 1991-92 school yearthey were teaching a median of 4 English Language Arts classes and had a median of 75 EnglishLanguage Arts students; those working in a non-semestered context also taught a median of 4classes, but had a median of 80 students.

TABLE 86

SCHOOL ORGANIZATION PROFILE (1991-92)(Grade 11)

Survey Questions

Teacher Responses

Semestered Non-semestered

Mean Median Mean Median

How many days are in your school cycle? 5.1 6.0 5.9 6.0

How many minutes are allotted to each grade 11 EnglishLanguage Arts class you teach?

per cycle: 328.3 395.0 212.0 240.0per day: 69.2 73.3 36.7 40.0

How many minutes preparation time do you have?per cycle: 257.0 240.0 230.0 240.0per day: 55.6 54.2 39.9 40.0

How many English Language Arts classes do you teach thissemester/year? 4.1 4.0 4.7 4.0

To how many students do you teach English Language Arts thissemester/year? 80.0 75.0 79.0 80.0


167

169

According to the survey data, the "median" grade 11 English Language Arts teacher teachingin a semestered system in 1991-92 worked in a school operating on a 6-day cycle, within whicha total of 240 minutes (or 54.2 minutes per day) were available as preparation time, and 395minutes (or 73.3 minutes per day) were allotted to each English Language Arts class beingtaught; the "median" teacher working in a non-semestered context taught on a 6-day cycle,within which a total of 240 minutes (or 40 minutes per day) were available as preparation timeand an equal amount of time was allotted to each English Language Arts class. Therecommended time allotment for grade 11 English Language Arts is 110 hours for one credit.It appears that the median time allotments for a class reported by teachers working innon-semestered systems are closer to the recommended time allotments than those reported byteachers working in semestered systems.

Teacher Influence in Decision Making (Item II[HD

Teachers were asked to rate the degree of influence they have over various decisions concerningthe organization and teaching of grade 11 English Language Arts in their respective schools.Responses to this question are presented in Table 87 below.

While a large majority of teachers (70.9%) perceived themselves as having "great influence"

0 over the amount of time allotted to the various dimensions of the English Language Artsprogram, few claimed to have much influence concerning the overall time allotment of theprogram (86.2% had "little or no influence").

TABLE 87


(Grade 11)

Area of InfluenceGreat

InfluenceSome


Choice of learning strategies to teach 83.8% 14.2% 0.8% 1.2%Choice of teaching methods/strategies 82.6 14.2 1.6 1.6The division of time within the ELA's timeallotment (reading, writing, literature) 70.9 18.6 8.5 2.0Choice of evaluation methods/instruments 68.0 29.6 1.2 1.2Choice of teaching materials/reading program 61.9 34.4 2.0 1.6Materials added to the school library 22.7 63.2 12.1 2.0The amount and kind of professionaldevelopment 22.3 51.8 24.3 1.6The overall time allotment 2.8 9.3 86.2 1.6

i8 8 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

170

Based on survey responses, the majority of teachers have extensive influence over the contentof the English Language Arts program and the manner in which it is taught. Over three-fifthsof the teachers indicated they have "great influence" over the choice of teachingmaterials/reading program, teaching methods/strategies, learning strategies to teach, andevaluation methods/instruments, the remainder indicating they have "some" or "little/no"influence in these areas.

In contrast, less than a quarter of the respondents reported having extensive influence in theprocess of selecting library resources for their school, or in the process of determining theamount and type of professional development made available to them; approximatelythree-quarters reported having "some" or "little/no" influence in each of these areas. Only1.6% of the survey participants noted other areas in which they perceive themselves to have anydegree of influence.

Availability of Support Services (Item II[I])

Survey participants were given an opportunity to comment on the extent to which specific typesof support services are available in their schools, choosing one of three response options: "veryavailable," "available," and "not available." When reviewing the teacher ratings reported inTable 88 below, it is important to keep in mind that the availability of resources is dependentupon the size, clientele needs and policy decisions of schools/divisions represented in the survey.

TABLE 88

TEACHER RATING OF AVAILABILITY OFSUPPORT SERVICES IN SCHOOLS

(Grade 11)



Available NR

Library technician(s) 35.2% 45.3% 16.2% 3.2%Department head or team leader(s) 34.0 23.9 38.5 3.6Qualified teacher librarian(s) 30.4 25.9 39.7 4.0Resource teacher(s) 23.9 51.0 23.5 1.6

Divisional consultant(s) 14.2 41.7 39.7 4.5Teacher aide(s) 11.7 45.3 39.3 3.6Special education teacher(s) 9.7 42.1 42.9 5.3Speech pathologist(s) 6.1 63.2 20.6 10.1

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 1E5J

171

Approximately two-fifths of the teachers reported the unavailability of five of the eight supportservices listed: teacher aides, spc<ial education teachers, department head or team leaders,divisional consultants, and qualified teacher librarians. Just over a fifth also noted that resourceteachers and speech pathologists are not available to them. Only three types of support serviceswere reported to be readily available by about one-third of the teachers: library technicians,department head or team leaders, and qualified teacher-librarians. A small percentage of teachers(2.8%) made additional comments regarding the availability of support services, a few notingother types of support but most qualifying their ratings with respect to the individual supportservices listed in the survey.

THE CURRICULUM

This section of the Teacher Questionnaire requested information on the availability of EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum documents (items III[A]) and the extent to which teachers use andunderstand the curriculum (items III[B,C]). It also asked teachers to rate the adequacy of thecurriculum documents (item III[D]).

The results reported in Table 89 below indicate that most teachers have copies of each of thethree curriculum documents applicable to the Senior Years English Language Arts program, butrarely make use of them. Approximately two-thirds reported using the documents either"quarterly" or "never," and a significant proportion did not respond. These results areparticularly surprising considering that the documents are new or relatively recent publications.

TABLE 89


(Grade 11)


Curriculum Document Yes No NR Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never NR

English Language Arts:Overview K -12 (1988) 83.8% 12.6% 3.6% 2.0% 8.9% 49.8% 22.7% 16.6%

English Language Arts:Grades 9-12 (1987) 91.1 5.7 3.2 3.2 15.4 53.8 14.6 13.0

English Language Arts:Senior Years 9-12 (1991) 89.9 8.9 1.2 4.0 23.5 51.4 10.5 10.5


172

Nearly a fifth of the survey participants (19.4%) provided explanations of why they rarely ornever use one or more of the curriculum documents. Twelve respondents offered specific criticalcomments regarding the content and format of the curriculum documents, describing them ascomplicated, lacking in relevance and specificity, impractical, unrealistic, difficult to apply,overwhelming in scope, hard to understand, vague, abstract, verbose, awkward, unwieldy, andso on. Respondents did not specify to which of the three documents these criticisms apply. Sincethe Technical Advisory Committee members reviewing these comments have previously heardsimilar anecdotal comments regarding the 1987 document, their impression is that thesecriticisms refer primarily or exclusively to the 1987 publication, and not to the 1991 document.

More than twenty of the respondents who provided explanations of why they rarely or never usethe documents made a distinction between using and consulting the guides. Most of theseteachers stated that they use the documents (or select ideas from them) in establishing courseobjectives, planning a year's work and/or developing unit plans, after which they make anongoing effort to integrate the curriculum concepts with their teaching and programming,reviewing and referring to the curriculum resources periodically or as needed. Several teachersindicated they read the documents upon receiving them, but do not use them regularly. A fewnoted they offer effective programs without using the curriculum guides.

Although the majority of teachers professed to make infrequent or no use of the EnglishLanguage Arts curriculum documents, nearly all teachers rated their knowledge of the grade 11curriculum documents as "adequate" (54.7%) or "very adequate" (37.7%). More thannine-tenths of the teachers also considered themselves to have an adequate or highly adequateunderstanding of what grade 11 students should be doing in English Language Arts (92.7%), andof the teaching strategies appropriate for that level (90.7%).

The final item in this section of the questionnaire asked teachers to rate the need for revision ofthe various components of English Language Arts: Grades 9-12 (1987): the Overview,Research Basis, Grades 9, 10, 11, 12, and 12 (300) Elective Credits, and Bibliography.Approximately half (49.8%) the teachers considered the grade 11 section of the guide to besatisfactory, and a quarter (24.7%) felt it needed revision. On average, a little more thantwo-fifths of the teachers (44.0%) registered satisfaction with the various parts of the guide, afifth (20.3%) registered dissatisfaction, and more than a third (35.7%) chose not to give a rating.The non-response rate for this survey item was exceptionally high. Since a large number ofteachers rarely or never use the documents, they may not have considered themselves in aposition to assess them.

1.9 1


TEACHING MATERIALS

173

A section of the teacher survey inquired abc..t the type, range, quality and availability ofmaterials used in teaching grade 11 English Language Arts. The purpose of this section was todetermine how teachers are addressing the grade 11 English Language Arts curriculum goal ofexposing students to a wide range of reading materials to enable them to develop anunderstanding and appreciation of various styles of communication (diverse uses and effects oflanguage).

In the first item, teachers were presented with a list of twelve different types of teachingmaterials and asked to indicate the frequency with which they used the respective materials intheir reading/English Language Arts program during the 1991-92 school year (item IV[A]). Thematerials are listed in Table 90 below according to the reported frequency of "weekly" and"monthly" use combined.

TABLE 90


(Grade 11)

Materials Used

Frequency of Use


Literary materials:Novels 76.9% 32.4% 44.5% 17.8% 0.8% 4.5%Short prose 72.4 36.0 36.4 22.3 1.2 4.0Poetry 59.9 22.7 37.2 34.4 1.6 4.0Plays 54.6 11.7 42.9 38.1 2.4 4.9

Expository materials:Reference materials 59.1 20.2 38.9 32.4 3.2 5.3Newspapers, magazines 56.6 20.6 36.0 34.4 4.5 4.5Content area materials 54.6 28.3 26.3 25.9 7.3 12.1

Audio-visual materials:Videotapes/films 63.1 10.1 53.0 32.0 0.8 4.0Audiotapes 25.5 2.8 22.7 40.5 23.1 10.9

Integrated language series 38.5 16.2 22.3 20.6 28.7 12.1

Computers 34.8 17.0 17.8 17.4 37.2 10.5

Student-authored materials(e.g., anthologies) 25.5 7.3 18.2 40.1 27.9 6.5

1 C. 0Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

174

If "weekly" and "monthly" use is taken as a definition of frequent use, the majority of teachersappear to be making frequent use of the following materials for English Language Artsinstruction: literary texts (novels, short prose, poetry, plays); videotapes/films; and expositorytexts (reference materials, newspapers and magazines, and content area materials). (Teacherswere not asked how copyright laws affect their use of expository text.) Approximately a quarteror more of the teachers indicated they "never" use audiotapes, student-authored materials,integrated language series, and computers. The comparatively high rate of non-response withrespect to these materials may be a further indication of lack of use.

Teachers were also invited to rate various factors influencing choice and quality of EnglishLanguage Arts materials used in the 1991-92 school year (item IV[B]). As reflected in Table91 below, between three- and four-fifths of the teachers gave a rating of "excellent" or "good"to the following factors: access to a variety of materials; quality and relevance of materialsavailable; range of reading levels in available materials; and Canadian content of availablematerials. The two factors rated as "fair" or "poor" by the majority of teachers were: accessto information about new materials and budget for materials.

TABLE 91


(Grade 11)

Excellent+ Good

Excellent Good Fair Poor NR

Access to a variety of materials 79.0% 22.3% 56.7% 16.6% 2.4% 2.0%Quality and relevance of materials available 76.1 19.8 56.3 19.0 2.4 2.4Range of reading levels in available materials 62.4 15.0 47.4 30.8 4.9 2.0Canadian content of available materials 60.3 11.7 48.6 33.6 3.6 2.4Access to information about new materials 43.0 5.3 37.7 45.3 9.3 2.4Budget for materials 35.6 3.6 32.0 4.0.5 21.1 2.8

Just over three-quarters (76.5%) of the teachers reported having the option of purchasingmaterials not on the Manitoba authorized textbook list (item IV[C]). However, little more thana quarter (27.5%) of the teachers indicated that their school has a review process for evaluatingthese materials (item IV[13]).

Reading Final Report, French immersion Program V/3

S175

TEACHING PRACTICES

The purpose of this section of the survey was to obtain information on the range ant balance ofteaching strategies practiced by grade 11 English Language Arts teachers, and the importanceeducators ascribe to teaching various reading strategies and process skills.

Teaching Strategies Used (Item V[A])

Teachers were asked to specify the frequency with which they use various teacher-centered andstudent-centered activities in their teaching. The order in which the various activities are listedin Table 92 below, reflects the order of frequency of use reported by survey participants whenthe percentages of "daily" and "weekly" use are combined.

TABLE 92


(Grade 11)

Strategies UsedDaily +Weekly


Mini-lesson to whole class 87.4%

Large-group discussion 83.0Reading aloud to class 68.0Lecture to whole class(little discussion) 55.8


Small-group work fordiscussion/sharing/assignments 79.3

Reader response logs/journals 42.6Peer tutoring 40.5Shared reading 31.2

Bulk reading 26.7Instruction in note-taking 21.4Reading conferences 15.8

Readers theatre 6.5

1 9 4

Frequency of Use

Daily Weekly Monthly Never

36.8% 50.6% 7.7% 0.4% 4.5%34.0 49.0 12.6 0.8 3.614.2 53.8 26.7 2.4 2.8

10.9 44.9 26.7 10.5 6.9

29.1 50.2 17.4 0.8 2.413.0 29.6 34.8 16.6 6.19.3 31.2 34.4 19.0 6.16.5 24.7 39.3 21.1 8.56.5 20.2 34.8 26.3 12.12.0 19.4 62.8 11.3 4.50.4 15.4 34.0 41.3 8.90.0 6.5 38.5 44.5 10.5


176

These results leave no doubt that teacher-centered activities are practiced with greater frequencythan student-centered activities. Judging by their reported use of the various teaching strategies,more than four-fifths of the teachers present mini-lessons to the whole class daily/weekly, andjust over half deliver lectures to the whole class daily/weekly. Large-group discussion wasreported as a daily /weekly occurrence by over four-fifths of the teachers, and reading aloud tothe class was reported as a daily/weekly practice by just over two-thirds.

Small-group work (for discussion, sharing, and assignment completion) was the onlystudent-centered activity reported to be carried out daily/weekly by the majority of teachers.Approximately two-fifths of the teachers indicated they make daily/weekly use of peer tutoringand reader response logs/journals in their teaching. Just over three-fifths of the teachers reportedgiving students monthly instruction in note-taking. It is significant that approximately a fifth ofthe teachers noted they never incorporate peer tutoring and shared reading activities intoclassroom teaching, over a quarter never include bulk reading activities, and over two-fifthsnever involve their students in reading conferences and readers theatre. The non-response ratefor these activities was also higher than for most of the other activities listed.

Importance of Teaching Practices (Item V[B])

The second item in this section of the survey asked teachers to rate the importance of a rangeof instructional goals, reading strategies, and process skills currently emphasized in the grade11 reading/English Language Arts curriculum. The teacher ratings presented in Table 93 belowindicate that each of the specified strategies/skills/concepts holds a place of importance fornearly all teachers, although the degree of importance varies. (The various reading programdimensions are ordered according to the percentage of teachers rating them as "veryimportant".)

Over two-thirds of the teachers rated the following dimensions of a reading program as "veryimportant": opportunities for personal response; variety of reading material; oral discussion ofmaterials read; critical analysis; and pre-reading activities and setting purpose for reading.Between a third and a little over half also ascribed great importance to: differentiated learningexperiences; student understandiag and use of specific strategies for reading different types ofmaterials; oral reading fluency; student knowledge of literary concepts; teaching content areareading strategies; developmental reading instruction; and student understanding of the threemajor cuing systems in reading.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program1 `;_.4 5

177

TABLE 93


(Grade 11)


VeryImportant

SomewhatImportant

NotImportant NR

Opportunities for personal response 87.0% 10.5% 0.4% 2.0%Variety of reading material 85.0 12.1 0.8 2.0Oral discussion of materials read 81.4 15.8 0.0 2.8Critical analysis 72.1 24.7 0.8 2.4Pre-reading activities and setting purpose forreading 71.3 23.9 0.8 4.0Differentiated learning experiences 56.7 35.2 1.2 6.9Student understanding and use of specific strategiesfor reading different types of materials 55.9 38.1 1.6 4.5Oral reading fluency 47.0 47.8 1.6 3.6Student knowledge of literary concepts 46.6 47.8 2.4 3.2Teaching content area reading strategies 45.7 46.2 2.4 5.7Developmental reading instruction 38.9 47.4 3.2 10.5Student understanding of the three major cuingsystems in reading 34.4 46.6 6.1 13.0

EVALUATION

In the "Evaluation" section of the survey, teachers had an opportunity to rate the importanceof a range of products and processes used in evaluating students in reading (item VI[A]). Theteachers' ratings of the various means of evaluating reading are outlined in Table 94 below. (Theevaluation products and processes are listed according to the percentage of teachers rating themas "very important.")

196


178

TABLE 94


(Grade 11)



NotImportant NR


Daily work assignments 76.1% 21.5% 0.4% 2.0%Projects/presentations 64.0 34.4 0.0 1.6

Reading/writing portfolios 51.0 41.3 4.5 3.2Reading response journals or logs 45.7 47.0 4.9 2.4Written tests or examinations 38.5 54.7 4.9 2.0Bulk reading lists and experiences 20.6 57.5 13.8 8.1

Oral tests 19.4 66.0 11.3 3.2Informal reading inventories 16.6 62.3 15.4 5.7

Cloze tests 6.1 46.6 41.7 5.7

Standardized tests 4.9 44.5 44.9 5.7


Attitudes to reading 62.3 31.2 4.0 2.4

Group participation 58.7 36.4 2.8 2.0Self-evaluation 57.5 36.8 2.0 3.6

Individual conferencing 50.2 44.1 2.4 3.2

Observation 44.1 47.0 3.2 5.7

Strategy evaluation 31.2 55.9 3.6 9.3

Peer evaluation 29.1 56.7 11.7 2.4

According to the above survey results, most teachers attach some or great importance to all buttwo of the seventeen forms of evaluations listed. This suggests that teachers use a variety ofdifferent means of evaluation in their teaching.

Of the seven evaluation processes listed, four were considered by a small majority of teachersto be "very important" means of evaluating students in reading: attitudes to reading; groupparticipation; self-evaluation; and individual conferencing. The process of observation was ratedas "very important" and "somewhat important" by an almost equal proportion of teachers.Strategy evaluation and peer evaluation, although considered important by most teachers, werejudged to be of lesser importance than the other processes listed.

rt.1 I


179

The majority of teachers gave a "very important" rating to three of the ten evaluation productslisted: daily work assignments; projects/presentations; and reading/writing portfolios. Lessformally structured products, such as reading response journals/logs, bulk reading lists andexperiences and informal reading inventories, were given a "somewhat important" rating by thelargest proportion of survey respondents. While most teachers credited written tests/examinationsand oral tests with some or great importance, nearly half the teachers dismissed doze tests andstandardized tests as "not important."

A small percentage (5.3%) of teachers responded to the request to comment on any other typesof evaluations used during the past year in addition to those specified in the questionnaire (itemVI[B)). The following two types of activities were repeatedly cited as a basis for evaluatingstudents: oral activities (oral presentations, speech, public speaking, group discussion) and roleplaying or other dramatic activities. A number of teachers noted the use of a combination ofdifferent types of activities in the evaluation process.

The final question relating to student evaluation inquired about the percentage of time teachersspend in formative evaluation and summative evaluation respectively (item VI[C]). Based ontheir responses, grade 11 English Language Arts teachers spend a median of 60% of theirevaluation time in formative evaluation, and a median of 40% in summative evaluation.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Nearly a third (31.6%) of the survey participants took the opportunity to make additionalcomments regarding the teaching of reading at grade 11 (item VII[A]). These respondentsoffered a total of eighty-seven comments. Four of these teachers noted their lack of qualificationsto make observations due to their present teaching situation or experience. Survey respondentsrepeatedly commented on the following issues: nineteen respondents addressed various aspectsof the language arts curriculum; twelve reflected on students' reading skills and motivation toread; ten identified needs related to reading materials; six focused on the teaching of readingstrategies; six emphasized the need for professional development in reading-related areas; andfive commented on limitations imposed by time allotments. The remaining comments focusedon issues such as the following: teacher workload; the need for research in reading strategies;needs related to the 01 program; the 00/01 course distinction; needs in other languagedevelopment programs (English as a Second Language); grade to grade sequencing; studentwriting; the process of learning reading; approaches to teaching reading; reading as a life skill;evaluation of reading; the integration of reading, writing and listening in the language artsprogram; and the content and purpose of the teacher survey.

q1 c)Aeading Final Report, French Immersion Program

180

Teachers were also invited to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the grade 11 ReadingAssessment (item VII[B]). A third (33.6%) of the survey participants responded with a total ofninety-three comments: twenty respondents indicated they were not in a position to make anevaluative statement about the Reading Assessment since they were not involved in theassessment or had not seen a copy of the test; seven remarked on the validity of the readingtest/program; nine identified problems related to the testing population; twenty-nine providedinsights into the positive and negative aspects of the testing materials; three made suggestionson the test design; five reflected on the delivery of the reading program; eight focused on timingissues; six focused on the motivation of assessment participants; and three criticized the teacherquestionnaire. Individuals also made observations regarding integrated language arts, teachingtechniques, total participation in the assessment, test difficulty, assessment results, the scoringkey, and the Advanced Placement English Language Arts Examination. The teachers' commentsregarding the grade 11 Reading Assessment will be useful in the development of futureassessments.


S

181

CHAPTER 10




Response Rate

A significant finding of the grade 11 Reading Assessment results is the high rate of studentresponse to the multiple-choice items as well as to the open-ended items on each of the fivesubtests. This demonstrates that students were inclined to respond to and interact with theassessment reading materials.

Although the mean performance was higher on the multiple-choice items than on the open-endeditems, the latter type of question resulted in a high rate of complete and partial responsescombined. The open-ended responses provided insight into how students processed the readingmaterial and how they arrived at conclusions. They also demonstrated that students wereinteracting with the literature, albeit with varying degrees of success. By far the highestpercentage of responses reflected a partial understanding of the assigned tasks and/or texts,suggesting that students need more experience in developing and supporting their understandingmore fully.


The Meaning Vocabulary subtest results indicate that while students are relatively successful atunderstanding words whose meaning is literal and explicitly stated in the text, they haveconsiderable difficulty inferring vocabulary meaning from implicit contextual clues, includingstylistic and structural techniques, and/or from experience. This finding suggests that manystudents may be receiving insufficient instruction in acquiring appropriate strategies for usingcontext clues.


182


The exceptionally high mean performance on the Literal Comprehension subtest provides furtherevidence of the students' proficiency in understanaing explicitly stated meaning of various typesof reading materials. Students' literal comprehension skills were particularly strong with respectto the narrative and poetry, the content of which likely was the most age appropriate and hadthe greatest connection with the readers' experiences, interests, and points of view. The students'apparent skill in understanding the literal meaning of narrative and poetry is a positive finding.However, it also raises the question of whether literal comprehension in reading is taughtprimarily in connection with literary materials. If so, students are likely to have the greatestexperience with, and be most comfortable dealing with, literary text. This reinforces theimportance of exploring a wide range of non-fictional materials in the reading program,including a wide range of transactional and journalistic literature.

There are indications, however, that students are able to understand explicitly stated meaningin non-fictional material. Students demonstrated strong literal comprehension skills in relationto the table and charts when they were expected to locate or identify statistical data. Althoughfew students experienced difficulty reading the information in the table/charts, a comparativelyhigh number had difficulty manipulating and using the data.

The Literal Comprehension items allowing for the use/application of a range of strategies tosolve a problem presented the greatest difficulty for students. This suggests that students haveinsufficient facility in the use of a range of strategies for "making meaning" of various typesof text, and have inadequate conscious awareness (metacognition) of the reading strategies theyneed and/or use. The implications of these findings are that students need direct instruction in

the use of a wide range of appropriate strategies, as well as guided practice in choosingappropriate strategies, and opportunities to use them independently.

On the whole, the curriculum objectives related to literal comprehension appear to have beenadmirably achieved. This achievement merits recognition. Moreover, it provides incentive forencouraging students to continue to extend and move beyond literal comprehension towardsunderstanding and processing reading materials at higher cognitive levels.


Widely varying results are evident for both the multiple-choice and open-ended items on theInterpretive Comprehension subtest. Overall, students performed best on the narrative-relatedmultiple-choice items. The vast majority demonstrated effective interpretive comprehension intheir responses to three of the four items focusing on the short story, again suggesting thatstudents may have more experience with narration than with other types of text.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program2 I) 1

181

CHAPTER 10




Response Rate

A significant finding of the grade 11 Reading Assessment results is the high rate of studentresponse to the multiple-choice items as well as to the open-ended items on each of the fivesubtests. This demonstrates that students were inclined to respond to and interact with theassessment reading materials.

Although the mean performance was higher on the multiple-choice items than on the open-endeditems, the latter type of question resulted in a high rate of complete and partial responsescombined. The open-ended responses provided insight into how students processed the readingmaterial and how they arrived at conclusions. They also demonstrated that students wereinteracting with the literature, albeit with varying degrees of success. By far the highestpercentage of responses reflected a partial understanding of the assigned tasks and/or texts,suggesting that students need more experience in developing and supporting their understandingmore fully.


The Meaning Vocabulary subtest results indicate that while students are relatively successful atunderstanding words whose meaning is literal and explicitly stated in the text, they haveconsiderable difficulty inferring vocabulary meaning from implicit contextual clues, includingstylistic and structural techniques, and/or from experience. This finding suggests that manystudents may be receiving insufficient instruction in acquiring appropriate strategies for usingcontext clues.


182


The exceptionally high mean performance on the Literal Comprehension subtest provides further

evidence of the students' proficiency in understanding explicitly stated meaning of various types

of reading materials. Students' literal comprehension skills were particularly strong with respect

to the narrative and poetry, the content of which likely was the most age appropriate and hadthe greatest connection with the readers' experiences, interests, and points of view. The students'

apparent skill in understanding the literal meaning of narrative and poetry is a positive finding.However, it also raises the question of whether literal comprehension in reading is taughtprimarily in connection with literary materials. If so, students are likely to have the greatestexperience with, and be most comfortable dealing with, literary text. This reinforces theimportance of exploring a wide range of non-fictional materials in the reading program,including a wide range of transactional and journalistic literature.

There are indications, however, that students are able to understand explicitly stated meaningin non-fictional material. Students demonstrated strong literal comprehension skills in relation

to the table and charts when they were expected to locate or identify statistical data. Althoughfew students experienced difficulty reading the information in the table/charts, a comparativelyhigh number had difficulty manipulating and using the data.

The Literal Comprehension items allowing for the use/application of a range of strategies tosolve a problem presented the greatest difficulty for students. This suggests that students haveinsufficient facility in the use of a range of strategies for "making meaning" of various typesof text, and have inadequate conscious awareness (metacognition) of the reading strategies theyneed and/or use. The implications of these findings are that students need direct instruction in

the use of a wide range of appropriate strategies, as well as guided practice in choosingappropriate strategies, and opportunities to use them independently.

On the whole, the curriculum objectives related to literal comprehension appear to have been

admirably achieved. This achievement merits recognition. Moreover, it provides incentive forencouraging students to continue to extend and move beyond literal comprehension towardsunderstanding and processing reading materials at higher cognitive levels.


Widely varying results are evident for both the multiple-choice and open-ended items on theInterpretive Comprehension subtest. Overall, students performed best on the narrative-relatedmultiple-choice items. The vast majority demonstrated effective interpretive comprehension in

their responses to three of the four items focusing on the short story, again suggesting thatstudents may have more experience with narration than with other types of text.


183

Overall, the results for the Interpretive Comprehension subtest give a strong indication thatstudents are struggling with reading tasks involving an interpretation of stylistic elements of text.In particular, students appear to lack sufficient strategies for understanding an author's use oftone to convey a mood or to communicate attitudes toward a subject and/or audience. Forexample, slightly over two-fifths of the students selected the correct word, from a choice offour, describing the pervading mood of one of the poetry selections (item 25). The satiricalnature of the expository article, written from a female point of view, also appeared to presentconsiderable difficulty for students.

In general, students experienced the greatest difficulty interpreting the tone and intent of theexpository reading selection. The two open-ended items (items K, M) which resulted in a highrate of wrong responses involved highly demanding inferential reading tasks focusing on stylisticelements of expository text such as the use of persuasive techniques/strategies. In responding tothe multiple-choice item (item 47) inquiring about the main purpose of the exposition, just overa third of the students noted correctly that the purpose of the satirical article is to "persuade."Approximately two-fifths indicated incorrectly that the purpose of the expository text is to"document," which may be an indication that many students approached the question with thefalse preconceived idea that the purpose of all expository writing is to inform or document.These students were unable to adjust their thinking in relation to a type of expository text withwhich they may have had little or no familiarity and which likely had the least connection withtheir own experience and point of view.

Evidently, the majority of students are unable to recognize that exposition can have a variety ofdifferent voices, and that these voices have an impact on the discourse and on the reader. Thisfinding suggests that students need help in developing strategies for understanding abstract andcomplex elements of style such as the use and effect of tone, voice and point of view. Forexample, since the majority of the expository material presented in the classroom is written froma male point of view, students may need more experience with a female voice in expositorywriting. In any case, students need greater exposure to a diverse range of expository text.

The results for the Interpretive Comprehension subtest raise some concerns about theimplementation of the grade 11 English Language Arts curriculum guidelines which emphasizethe study of style in relation to a wide variety of texts.


Among the significant findings in the Critical-Reflective Comprehension subtest results are thehigh response rate for the eleven open-ended items and the high rate of complete and partialresponses to the narrative- and poetry-related open-ended items. This indicates that nearly allassessment participants were interacting with the reading materials nd that the vast majority ofstudents were achieving complete or partial success in evaluating the implications of the narrativeand poetry at a critical-reflective level. By far the highest percentage of respondents were,however, only partially successful.

2 '1 4 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

184

On the whole, students were quite successful in responding to the poetry items (items G, H, I[ii& iii]) for which they were expected to draw on prior knowledge/experience and makecomparisons and/or distinctions between different parts of one reading selection or between twodifferent texts. These tasks challenged students to extend their subjective personal response toa more distanced or objective personal response. The results for these items demonstrate thatmany students are developing greater objectivity in their responses, which is a focus ofinstruction in the Senior Years English Language Arts curriculum.

Significantly, however, the items requiring a more distanced personal response to the expositorytext resulted in an exceptionally high rate of wrong responses (items L, N[i & ii]). As the textwas a complex, satirical article it may have elicited an immediate subjective response rather thanan objective appraisal of the expository strategies/techniques and the structure of the text, whichwas essential to developing an understanding of the article. The relatively weak performance onthese items suggests that students may have had insufficient exposure to and experience dealingwith exposition of a satirical nature. Not only is satire unexpected in students' experience ofexposition but, in the form of print, it is also extremely challenging for students since it providesfew cues, unlike situation comedy, for example, in which tone of voice and facial expressionprovide overt contextual cues. Students need exposure to text which challenges them to movefrom a personal response to a more distanced objective one.

A review of the results for the four multiple-choice items demanding critical-reflectivecomprehension indicates that students are more competent at evaluating thematic elements of text(items 28, 40) than they are at evaluating stylistic elements (items 20, 41). This finding is ofconcern since evaluation is the level of engagement and style is the instructional emphasis in thegrade 11 English Language Arts curriculum.


Since the Reading Strategies and Process Skills subtest did not assess students on an extensiverange of thinking and metacognitive strategies involved in the reading process, the results maynot be fully representative of students' abilities in this area. Some encouraging developments are,however, reflected in the data. A large majority of students demonstrated their ability to selectappropriate reading strategies for particular situations when given a choice of several strategies.Students appear to be a little more proficient at identifying strategies than they are at applyingthem. As students were not expected to propose or explain their use of strategies, their responsesdo not necessarily indicate extensive awareness of the strategies involved in the reading process.Nonetheless, the selection of suitable strategies for given situations demonstrates someknowledge of the repertoire available.

,t 0Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

185


Students' Self-Concept as Readers and Choice of Reading Material

The reading survey data indicating that virtually all students view themselves as average or verygood readers and nearly all read for enjoyment and personal interest are of major significance.Almost three-quarters of the students reported buying their own reading materials, and just overthree-fifths indicated that they exchange reading material with friends or family. These findingsreflect prior motivation to read and imply informal discussion and interaction about reading.Although the survey did not provide information on the kinds of materials students buy, one canassume they are buying their preferred reading materials.

Most students reported spending at least some time reading a variety of different texts. However,students appear to have the strongest preference for magazines and newspapers. With thefrequent stop-and-start reading required for these materials, there may be some cause forquestioning whether the range of reading materials most commonly read by students hinders thedevelopment of essential reading skills such as reading fluency. Given the vast choice ofmagazines available for young people and their influence in shaping values, there is a concernabout whether students have the necessary skills to choose materials selectively and to read themcritically. The instructional implications of these findings are quite clear. Teachers need toensure that the range of reading materials explored in the classroom is balanced and encouragestudents to read texts that contribute to the development of fluency in reading. Moreover,teachers need to provide instruction in critical reading and examination of various types ofreading materials, particularly those materials students tend to read on their own.

The data regarding the extent to which students use library resources for personal interestreading are a cause for concern. Less than two-thirds of the students reported using schooland/or class libraries or public libraries to obtain reading materials of personal interest, whichsuggests that these centres may not be meeting the needs of a significant component of thestudent population. Limited access to public libraries, particularly in some rural areas, and theabsence of teacher-librarians in some school divisions (and therefore perhaps no system forselecting and marketing library resources) may be among the factors contributing to thisproblem. Parents need to press for greater access to public libraries for their children. The roleof the teacher-librarian is also an important factor to consider. It is important that schoollibrarians view themselves not only as reference librarians, but also as educators whoseresponsibilities include the assertive promotion of reading materials that will develop studentliteracy. Manitoba Education and Training has an action plan regarding library availability andlibrary use in schools. Schools and school divisions need to implement the plan by using thesupporting documents which include ways to: promote the library as a centre where studentswant to be and learn; teach students how to gain access to library resources; and ensure teacherand teacher-librarian collaboration.

2 itsReading Final Report, French Immersion Program

186

Another major concern emerging from the survey responses is that students perceive themselvesas having a very limited degree of choice in the selection of reading materials for EnglishLanguage Arts classes, which may be one of the factors affecting students' choice of readingmaterials outside of school. By promoting choice of material in the classroom, teachersencourage students to take ownership of their learning which would naturally extend beyond theclassroom. Teachers should have a range of options through which to present choice, includingthe following: open choice, negotiated choice, and guided choice (that is, freedom to choosewithin a given range of options). Opportunities to exercise choice in reading materials will helpstudents grow as independent readers and learners.

Time Spent Reading

Almost all students participating in the reading survey reported spending some time reading.Very few, however, reported spending more than three hours a week reading for pleasure orreading for English Language Arts either in or out of school. One of the factors limitinginterpretation of these findings is that the survey did not ask for details on what students werereading for English Language Arts in or out of school. There is no indication, for example, ofwhether students interpreted English I nnguage Arts reading out of school as sustained reading,novel reading, or something else. The amount of time spent reading for English Language Artsin school could be interpreted pc -,itively or negatively, depending on the kind of reading studentswere engaged in and the decisions involved. If the reading students did was strictly assignedreading, the survey results could reflect a negative pattern of instruction; conversely, if studentsinterpreted the question as asking how much time they chose to spend reading English LanguageArts materials to extend reading competencies, the results are positive.


Students' responses to the survey items inquiring about shared and extended reading experiencesare largely disturbing. although there are also some encouraging responses. One of the positivefindings is that just over half the teachers read aloud to their class daily or weekly. A majorproblem identified in the survey responses is that students do not have and/or do not takeadequate opportunities to discuss their reading with others, particularly with their teachers.Almost three-fifths of the survey respondents indicated they never or almost never discusspersonal reading with their teachers. These results may be a reflection of the reality of timeconstraints in ensuring the involvement of all students in discussion; however, they may also bean indication that teachers do not show an interest in reading and/or neglect to show an interestin what students are reading. If teachers neglect to model interest in and discussion aboutreading, they will fail to encourage students to read or share reading interests. It is theresponsibility of teachers to invite, initiate and involve students in discussion regarding personalinterest reading, either through individual contact (for example, through informal interaction orstudent conferencing) or in small-group sharing, literature circles or classroom discussion.


7

185


Students' Self-Concept as Readers and Choice of Reading Material

The reading survey data indicating that virtually all students view themselves as average or verygood readers and nearly all read for enjoyment and personal interest are of major significance.Almost three-quarters of the students reported buying their own reading materials, and just overthree-fifths indicated that they exchange reading material with friends or family. These findingsreflect prior motivation to read and imply informal discussion and interaction about reading.Although the survey did not provide information on the kinds of materials students buy, one canassume they are buying their preferred reading materials.

Most students reported spending at least some time reading a variety of different texts. However,students appear to have the strongest preference for magazines and newspapers. With thefrequent stop-and-start reading required for these materials, there may be some cause forquestioning whether the range of reading materials most commonly read by students hinders thedevelopment of essential reading skills such as reading fluency. Given the vast choice ofmagazines available for young people and their influence in shaping values, there is a concernabout whether students have the necessary skills to choose materials selectively and to read themcritically. The instructional implications of these findings are quite clear. Teachers need toensure that the range of reading materials explored in the classroom is balanced and encouragestudents to read texts that contribute to the development of fluency in reading. Moreover,teachers need to provide instruction in critical reading and examination of various types ofreading materials, particularly those materials students tend to read on their own.

The data regarding the extent to which students use library resources for personal interestreading are a cause for concern. Less than two-thirds of the students reported using schooland/or class libraries or public libraries to obtain reading materials of personal interest, whichsuggests that these centres may not be meeting the needs of a significant component of thestudent population. Limited access to public libraries, particularly in some rural areas, and theabsence of teacher-librarians in some school divisions (and therefore perhaps no system forselecting and marketing library resources) may be among the factors contributing to thisproblem. Parents need to press for greater access to public libraries for their children. The roleof the teacher-librarian is also an important factor to consider. It is important that schoollibrarians view themselves not only as reference librarians, but also as educators whoseresponsibilities include the assertive promotion of reading materials that will develop studentliteracy. Manitoba Education and Training has an action plan regarding library availability andlibrary use in schools. Schools and school divisions need to implement the plan by using thesupporting documents which include ways to: promote the library as a centre where studentswant to be and learn; teach students how to gain access to library resources; and ensure teacherand teacher-librarian collaboration.

2.'18Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

186

Another major concern emerging from the survey responses is that students perceive themselvesas having a very limited degree of choice in the selection of reading materials for EnglishLanguage Arts classes, which may be one of the factors affecting students' choice of readingmaterials outside of school. By promoting choice of material in the classroom, teachersencourage students to take ownership of their learning which would naturally extend beyond theclassroom. Teachers should have a range of options through which to present choice, includingthe following: open choice, negotiated choice, and guided choice (that is, freedom to choosewithin a given range of options). Opportunities to exercise choice in reading materials will helpstudents grow as independent readers and learners.

Time Spent Reading

Almost all students participating in the reading survey reported spending some time reading.Very few, however, reported spending more than three hours a week reading for pleasure orreading for English Language Arts either in or out of school. One of the factors limitinginterpretation of these findings is that the survey did not ask for details on what students werereading for English Language Arts in or out of school. There is no indication, for example, ofwhether students interpreted English Language Arts reading out of school as sustained reading,novel reading, or something else. The amount of time spent reading for English Language Artsin school could be interpreted positively or negatively, depending on the kind of reading studentswere engaged in and the decisions involved. If the reading students did was strictly assignedreading, the survey results could reflect a negative pattern of instruction; conversely, if studentsinterpreted the question as asking how much time they chose to spend reading English LanguageArts materials to extend reading competencies, the results are positive.


Students' responses to the survey items inquiring about shared and extended reading experiencesare largely disturbing, although there are also some encouraging responses. One of the positivefindings is that just over half the teachers read aloud to their class daily or weekly. A majorproblem identified in the survey responses is that students do not have and/or do not takeadequate opportunities to discuss their reading with others, particularly with their teachers.Almost three-fifths of the survey respondents indicated they never or almost never discusspersonal reading with their teachers. These results may be a reflection of the reality of timeconstraints in ensuring the involvement of all students in discussion; however, they may also bean indication that teachers do not show an interest in reading and/or neglect to show an interestin what students are reading. If teachers neglect to model interest in and discussion aboutreading, they will fail to encourage students to read or share reading interests. It is theresponsibility of teachers to invite, initiate and involve students in discussion regarding personalinterest reading, either through individual contact (for example, through informal interaction orstudent conferencing) or in small-group sharing, literature circles or classroom discussion.


187

Another related problem reflected in the survey results is that a high percentage of students feelthey are rarely or never given opportunities to work in pairs or small groups for readingactivities or to respond to their reading in a journal/log. This suggests that for many studentsreading is a passive rather than an active process. Since the majority of students rarely sharetheir reading with others, either through discussion with teachers or through joint readingactivities, nor respond to their reading in the form of journal or log entries, they may have fewoccasions to react to reading or develop inferential and critical-reflective reading/comprehensionskills.


Students' responses to questions inquiring about the frequency with which their EnglishLanguage Arts teachers facilitate the use of reading strategies before, during and after readingwarrant close attention. Judging by the students' perceptions reported in the survey, the readingstrategy most commonly employed by English Language Arts teachers is giving students a listof questions or prompts to respond to as they read. This finding is encouraging if the questionsare provided with the intent of helping students process their reading, or if teachers are helpingstudents formulate questions to assist them in the reading process. If, however, the questions aresupplied as a set package of chapter or unit questions to be answered after students completetheir assigned reading, the results are troubling.

What is perhaps more disturbing is the high percentage of students reporting that their teacherrarely or never helps prepare them for reading by suggesting strategies to use for a particularreading task or by establishing a purpose for reading before students begin to read. Manyteachers also appear to give minimal or no attention to helping students organize theirinformation after they read. Since students may not always understand or recognize the strategiespresented by their teachers, it is possible that the above pre- and post-reading strategies are usedmore extensively than reported.

The data regarding the students' independent use of various reading strategies also identifypossible weaknesses. Of particular concern is the evidence that the majority of students rarelyor never skim material before reading, pose questions of the material prior to reading, or usethe author's organization to aid understanding. Furthermore, only about half the students notedthat they frequently vary their reading rate to suit the content of the reading material and/or thepurpose for reading. It is probable that students actually apply these reading strategies withgreater frequency/skill than they are conscious of doing (for example, students may not realizewhen they vary their reading speed to accommodate a particular text or task). If this is the case,teachers have a responsibility to help students come to a conscious awareness of the readingstrategies they need for, and use in, their reading. Students clearly need help in taking consciousownership of reading strategies.

n0Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

188



In many respects, the extensive teaching experience reported by English Language Arts teacherscan be viewed positively. It seems, however, that the Senior Years English Language Artsprogram has a disproportionately low number of newly trained and/or less experienced teachers.The program could only benefit from a more balanced mix of new and experienced teachers,since both bring valuable perspectives to the classroom.

A review of the survey data reveals an apparent gap in recent academic training and participationin professional development on the part of English Language Arts teachers, although the datamust be interpreted with some caution considering the high non-response rate for itemsaddressing these issues. Most of the teachers who provided information on their post-secondaryeducation had obtained little or no academic training in the teaching of English Language Artsand the teaching of reading, especially not within the past five years, during which time therehave been major shifts in educational emphases particularly in English Language Arts. Quitepossibly these changes have occurred in a context where there has been little systemic support.Furthermore, although nearly all teachers reported having had some occasion to participate inprofessional development sessions in reading/English Language Arts during the past five-yearperiod, the median number of hours of professional development reported was only two hoursper year.

These findings lead to inquiry about why teachers choose not to pursue academic training inlanguage based curricula (reading/language arts). Some may be inhibited by the possibility thatby obtaining additional credits they will advance to a higher salary and will therefore limit theiremployment opportunities. In some cases, teachers need board approval for course selection inorder to receive recognition for further course credits, which raises questions about whetherboards recognize courses teachers want to take, and whether appropriate courses are accessibleto all who require them. Factors such as these suggest that administrative decisions may workagainst the educational development of teachers, rather than serving to promote suchdevelopment. The data may also be an indication that some teachers may still think "teachingreading" is not the responsibility of Senior Years educators.

When asked to rate their knowledge of various areas of reading instruction emphasized in thecurrent curriculum, from approximately one-quarter to three-quarters of the teachers selected"understand partly" or "do not understand" for each of the eight areas listed. The vast majorityof teachers also registered a need for professional development in various areas of readinginstruction, with approximately nine-tenths registering some or great need on the topics of"evaluation techniques for reading," "strategies for specific types of text and reading processesincluding content area reading methods," "teaching approaches," and "basic reading theory."The teachers' self-ratings, combined with their call for professional development, may indicatethat many teachers feel they have an inadequate understanding of reading instruction.


189

Some inconsistencies are also evident in the ratings. For example, although nearly three-quartersof the teachers professed to have thorough knowledge of "content area reading," only abouttwo-fifths made the same claim with respect to the "teaching of reading strategies" which isintegral to an understanding of content area reading. Since the survey questionnaire did notinclude definitions of the terms designating the various areas of reading instruction, someteachers may have been confused about their meaning and may have answered the questionsaccording to their own definitions of the terms. In any case, those teachers who have beenreading the current literature on reading instruction will be familiar with the terminology sinceit forms the language base for discussion about reading instruction.

A further anomaly evident in the survey data is that teachers claimed to need significant help insome basic areas of reading instruction, yet many appear to do little professional reading toredress this need. What is, however, consistent with other survey findings, is that teachers feelthey receive little administrative support or encouragement for increasing/enhancing theirknowledge of reading/language arts through professional reading. This form of support isessential for change to occur.

Despite reporting limited recent involvement in professional development sessions and activitiesand professional reading or study, the majority of teachers attributed recent changes in theirteaching practice to the influence of these very factors. Professional advancement is clearly seenas an important way of promoting growth and shaping changes in teaching practices. Thus,regardless of the apparent discrepancies in the teacher responses, serious attention must be givento the teachers' expressed need for increased professional development experiences related toreading instruction.

Educational leaders need to re-examine their responsibilities in providing and ensuring teacherparticipation in professional development activities in various areas of reading instruction. Staffdevelopment plans are needed which recognize that change is a progressive long-term process,not a one-time professional development event. Although reading assessment is administered inEnglish Language Arts, reading instruction is a crucial dimension not only of the Language Artscurriculum but also of all other subject areas at all levels. Therefore, training in readinginstruction must be given priority within the limited time made available for professionaldevelopment.

School Organization

According to the survey data, a large majority of teachers feel they have a great deal of latitudein choosing teaching content and style of teaching. There is also disturbing evidence, however,that a significant percentage of teachers feel they do not have great influence over mattersdirectly connected with their classroom teaching. Of particular concern are the findings that overa quarter of the teachers have diminished influence over the division of time for the variousdimensions of the English Language Arts program, as well as over the choice of teachingmaterials/reading program, and the means of evaluation, which places lim.lations on the extentto which teachers are able to implement the curriculum.


1112

190

Over three-quarters of the teachers see themselves as having limited influence over decisionsrelated to professional development and library materials, both of which are essential resourcesfor effective teaching. The lack of teacher involvement in professional development decisionsimposes major restrictions on personal growth and prevents necessary changes in teachingpractices. Moreover, inadequate teacher participation in the selection of library materials hasserious implications for the availability of materials supporting classroom teaching, as well asfor student use of library resources. Teachers were not asked to specify whether limited (or lackof) participation in material selection is due to their own choice or whether it is an imposedrestriction. In any case, since reading materials constitute the foundation for a reading program,and since resource-based learning is a major emphasis in the High School Review strategies,there must be a systematic way to involve teachers in the selection process.

A surprisingly high percentage of teachers reported that various support services are "notavailable" in their respective schools. The response option "not available" could have beeninterpreted in several different ways depending on the size of school, the needs of the localclientele, or school/divisional policy. Consequently, there is no clear indication of whether therespective support services are not offered in the school, not necessary/applicable, or notaccessible to teachers even though support services personnel are ostensibly available (forexample, the work load of support services staff may be such that they are unable to provide theneeded services). At any rate, a significant percentage of teachers seem to have experienced alack of support from every type of service, which is bound to have immediate and long-termeffects on their teaching. For example, almost two-fifths of the teachers reported that departmentheads or team leaders are "not available" in their schools. If leadership for curriculumimplementation comes from department heads or team leaders, a large proportion of teachers arebeing deprived of guidance in this respect. Lack of access to qualified teacher librarians likewisehas implications for curriculum implementation, particularly for the promotion of appropriatereading materials and student access to library resources. Furthermore, as mainstreaming in theSenior Years program continues to progress, there will be an increasing need to rely on theassistance of such support services as teacher aides, special education teachers and resourceteachers.

The Curriculum

According to the survey results, nearly all teachers feel they have adequate or highly adequateknowledge of the grade 11 English Language Arts curriculum and the objectives and teachingstrategies appropriate for that level. Evidently many teachers have not gained this knowledgefrom the curriculum documents, judging by their reported use of the three applicable documents:English Language Arts: Overview K-12 (1988), English Language Arts: Grades 9-12 (1987),and English Language Arts: Senior Years 9-12 (1991). The majority of teachers indicated thatthey do not make extensive use of any of the curriculum documents, but only a relatively smallpercentage indicated that the various dimensions of the curriculum are in need of revision. Ofthe three documents, the Overview appears to be used least extensively, and yet the greatestproportion of teachers registered satisfaction with this particular component of the curriculum.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program4 ,

191

What is especially disturbing is the high percentage of teachers reporting that they rarely ornever use the curriculum support document, English Language Arts: Senior Years 9-12 (1991),a publication produced in response to requests for a practical resource to be used on a regularbasis. It is possible that some teachers are not clear on the distinction between the 1987 and1988 curriculum guides and the more practical 1991 curriculum support document. The latterpublication is not a revision of the curriculum guides, but has a distinctly different purpose.Teachers need to be aware that the three documents are developed to be used as follows:

English Language Arts: Overview K-12 (1988)

presents the rationale for the English Language Arts curriculum;states the K-12 English Language Arts goals and objectives;articulates a framework for organizing instruction.

English Language Arts: Grades 9-12 (1987)

presents an overview of Senior Years English Language Arts and its research basis;outlines the program for each of grades 9-12 core and electives.

English Language Arts: Senior Years 9-12 (1991)

articulates an overview for organizing the year's work;states program and specific goals for developing language through literature, language study,listening, speaking, reading, writing and learning;presents practical strategies, ideas, approaches and evaluation tools for developing languagethrough literature, etc.

Teaching Materials

Some of the data regarding the frequency with which teachers reported using various teachingmaterials are open to varying interpretations since the terms used to designate these materials(for example, reference materials, student authored materials, content area materials) may havehad different meanings for different teachers. Nonetheless, some conclusions can be drawn fromthe results. According to the teachers' estimations of the frequency with which they used variousmaterials in their reading/English Language Arts program in the 1991-92 school year, theteaching materials are weighted heavily with literary materials, particularly novels and shortprose. This indicates that there needs to be a further shift from viewing literature primarily asliterary works to viewing literature as encompassing the full range of reading materials to whichstudents must be exposed. A more balanced representation of the various types of text is needed,given that the Early, Middle and Senior Years curricula emphasize the use of a wide range ofmaterials.

2 1 4 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

192

Although the range of materials used in teaching does not appear to be sufficiently balanced,four-fifths of the teachers claimed to have good or excellent access to a variety of materials. Ahigh percentage of teachers, however, appear to have less than ideal access both to materialswith a range of reading levels and to information about new materials. These findings are causefor concern. They also raise the question of whether teachers are aware of the available sourcesof information. For example, teachers may be unaware that Manitoba Education and Trainingevaluates materials and provides extensive lists of approved or recommended material, includinglists of teacher reference material, in the Manitoba Text Book Bureau catalogue.

More than three-quarters of the teachers reported having the option of purchasing materials notincluded on the Manitoba authorized textbook list. This is a highly encouraging finding. It is ofconcern, however, that little more than a quarter of the schools have a review process forevaluating such materials. The apparent absence of a review process in a large majority ofschools, combined with the somewhat limited access to information about new materials,suggests that teachers may need to acquire additional resources for reviewing materials and/orbecome better informed of available resources such as the documents, Selection of LearningResources: Policies and Procedures for Manitoba Schools (1990) and School Library PolicyStatement (1991), produced by Manitoba Education and Training. To encourage and assistteachers in continuing to choose appropriate materials, Manitoba Education and Training mayneed to make more widely known its criteria/process for reviewing materials (to ensure, forexample, gender balance and representation of minority groups).

Teaching Practices

The survey results show that teachers are providing considerably more opportunities forteacher-centered activities than for student-centered activities, an imbalance which is contraryto the expectations set out in the curriculum. Moreover, in some respects there appears to belittle correlation between what teachers profess to value and what they practice in their teaching.For instance, nearly all teachers rated opportunities for personal responses as a "veryimportant" dimension of a reading program, and yet the majority reported making limited orno use of such opportunities: just over two-fifths of the teachers indicated they have theirstudents make daily or weekly use of reader response logs/journals; less than a third provideshared reading opportunities on a daily or weekly basis; and over two-fifths never provideopportunities for reading conferences and readers theatre. For adequate personal response, thesetypes of activities need to be used with much greater frequency.


193

Overall, the teachers' ratings of the importance of various dimensions of a reading program arelower than they ought to be for effective implementation of reading in the English Language Artscurriculum. It is disturbing to observe, for instance, that only a small majority of teachersascribed great importance to differentiated learning experiences, which form the core spirit ofthe curriculum. Having under three-quarters of the teachers attach great importance to criticalanalysis may also be inadequate since "evaluation" is the level of engagement for grade 11.Furthermore, although nearly all teachers emphasized the value of incorporating a variety ofmaterials in a reading program, only a little over half stressed the importance of studentunderstanding and use of specific strategies for reading different types of materials, and less thanhalf considered teaching content area reading strategies to be very important. Given thecurriculum emphasis on using a wide variety of texts, teachers may need to reconsider theimportance of teaching reading strategies. For effective implementation of the curriculum,teachers need to regard all dimensions of the reading program identified in the survey as highlyimportant and apply them to their teaching accordingly.

Evaluation

When given an opportunity to rate the importance of various means of evaluating reading, asubstantial majority of teachers ascribed some or great importance to fifteen of the seventeenproducts and processes listed. This suggests that teachers use a variety of different means ofevaluation in their teaching.

The teachers' ratings of the importance of a number of evaluation products and processes are,however, inconsistent with their ratings of the importance of teaching practices. For example,the vast majority of teachers indicated that providing "opportunities for personal response" isa very important teaching practice within a reading program, and yet under half reported makingdaily or weekly use of reader response journals/logs and under half saw the use of readingresponse journals/logs as a very important means of evaluation.

Also of concern is the degree of importance attached to some of the products and processes forevaluation purposes. The data indicating that less than a third of the teachers consider strategyevaluation as very important raise serious concerns about whether students are being givenappropriate assistance in developing a conscious awareness of the strategies they need and usein reading a variety of different texts. The importance ascribed to self-evaluation and peerevaluation is also too low, given the developmental stage of grade 11 students. A little over halfthe teachers gave a "very important" rating to self-evaluation, which is a necessary skill forindependent learning, and under a third gave this rating to peer evaluation, which is a naturalform of evaluation in collaborative learning. While it may be more difficult to assign marks tothese types of processes, it is crucial that they be taken into account in the marking and reportingsystem.

0i00 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

194

It is probable that those teachers who gave a "very important" rating to the various evaluationproducts and processes use them on a regular, ongoing basis. By extension, if teachers do notthink it is highly important to evaluate the various products and processes they may not beincorporating them in their teaching practices, or may be in danger of abandoning them.Teachers need to be provided with assistance in evaluating products and processes in ways thatare congruent with the curriculum and with the reporting system within which they function. Bybroadening the concept of evaluation and finding ways to evaluate the products and processesthey value, educators will maintain and enhance the integrity of their educational values andpractices.

SUMMARY OF GRADE 11 READING ASSESSMENT RESULTS


Overall, students appear to have little difficulty in word attack and word recognition skills andare more proficient at tasks requiring literal comprehension than they are ze. tasks demandinginferential and critical-reflective comprehension. This observation raises concerns about whetherthe instructional time spent on developing literal comprehension skills is disproportionate to thetime spent on inferential and critical-reflective comprehension skills, and whether students areinvolved in appropriate activities through which to explore inferential and critical-reflectivereading tasks. The students' performance may be an indication that they have insufficientopportunities to engage in co-operative and collaborative reading experiences which areconducive to learning and applying inferential and critical-reflective thinking strategies/processes.

There are indications that students are developing their ability to identify and select appropriatestrategies for particular reading situations. However, the assessment results also suggest thatstudents have insufficient knowledge of the range of strategies available, insufficient practice inapplying them to various types of reading materials, and inadequate conscious awareness of thestrategies they need and use in the reading process. Teaching students a large repertoire ofstrategies and giving them experience in making appropriate choices and applications for avariety of texts will enable students to raise the use of strategies to a conscious level.

A further conclusion that can be drawn from the assessment results is that students are morecompetent and/or experienced at making thematic interpretations than they are at making stylisticanalyses. The test data strongly suggest that in the delivery of the reading dimension of theEnglish Language Arts program, the study of textual content (for example, theme, topic)inappropriately takes precedence over the exploration of the use and manipulation of languagein a variety of texts, but particularly in expository text. This observation raises serious questionssuch as the following:


195

Why are there apparent gaps in the implementation of style in the English Language Artscurriculum, particularly as style is the instructional emphasis for grade 11?

Is there a misunderstanding about the meaning of the term "stylistic choices" as the use andmanipulation of language?

Is the use of language (its purpose, effects, functions, variety and influence), which is thecentral aim of the English Language Arts curriculum from kindergarten to grade 12,adequately addressed in classroom instruction?

Are students exposed to a sufficient range/variety of materials with which to explore the useof language? Is the explicitly stated curriculum goal of using a wide range of texts adequatelypursued in the classroom?

Do the curriculum guides and support materials suggest appropriate and adequate strategiesfor teaching the use of language, particularly related to style and including examples whichapply style to transactional and journalistic text?

Does the Senior Years curriculum adequately address the interrelationships among thevarious elements of language study at the different grade levels? That is, are thereappropriate linkages with respect to the instructional emphases across the Senior Yearscurriculum?

The students' apparent difficulty with reading tasks focusing on the use and manipulation oflanguage is of major concern, particularly considering that developing an understanding oflanguage and how it works within a wide range of reading materials is the instructional emphasisof the grade 11 English Language Arts curriculum. Moreover, since the Senior Years curriculumemphasizes the interrelationships among various elements of language and attempts to buildstudent knowledge over several years, students should have had considerable exposure to the useof language including style prior to grade 11.


The teacher survey and the student reading survey were included in the 1992 ReadingAssessment to give both teachers and students an opportunity to express their views on theimportance and implementation of various aspects of reading in the English Language Artsprogram. In many respects, the teachers' reports of classroom practices may well be moreinformed and realistic than the students' accounts. Nevertheless, what students perceive to behappening merits serious consideration. Ultimately, both the teachers' and students' responses,and the apparent inconsistencies between them, must be viewed in the light of students'performance on the Reading Assessment and the curriculum guidelines.

4..(1 18 Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

196

The assessment data demonstrating that students need to develop greater proficiency atperforming inferential and critical-reflective reading tasks must be reviewed in relation to thekinds of experiences that promote the development of these skills. Consistent with currentresearch in reading instruction, the curriculum emphasizes the use of shared/interactive andextended reading activities to help students develop these skills. According to the reading surveyresults, the majority of students infrequently or never discuss their personal interest reading withtheir teachers, have opportunities to work in pairs or small groups for reading activities, or haveoccasion to respond to their reading in a journal or log. The majority of teachers likewisereported making infrequent or no use of student-centered activities such as shared reading,reading conferences, readers theatre and reader response journals or logs; however, contrary tothe students' perceptions, four-fifths of the teachers reported making daily or weekly use ofsmall-group work for discussion, sharing and assignment completion.

In rating the importance of various types of products and processes for evaluating reading, onlyabout half the teachers gave a rating of "very important" to: reading/writing portfolios, readingresponse journals or logs, group participation, and individual conferencing. These ratings maybe indicative of teachers' reliance on traditional products to evaluate reading and/or their needfor assistance with evaluation focusing on process. If processes such as discussion about andresponses to reading are not evaluated, they may be in danger of disappearing from therepertoire of teaching strategies. Educators need to integrate evaluation into every aspect of theteaching/learning process. It is noteworthy that approximately nine-tenths of the teachersregistered a need for professional development on the topics of "evaluation techniques forreading" and "teaching approaches (e.g., grouping, paired learning)."

Several curriculum documents produced by Manitoba Education and Training provide informa-tion and suggestions on a variety of ways of evaluating reading. General information onevaluation is available in the following two curriculum guides: English Language Arts: OverviewK-12 (1988) and English Language Arts: Grades 9-12 (1987). Specific and concreteinformation is provided in the curriculum support document, English Language Arts: SeniorYears 9-12 (1991). There are also sections on evaluation in English Language Arts:Differentiating Teaching and Learning in Senior 1 and 2 (in press) and in Strategic Instruction:Differentiating Teaching and Learning Across the Curriculum , Senior 1 to 4 (in press).

The comparatively low mean performance on the Interpretive and Critical-Reflective Compre-hension subtests also leads to reflection about whether students are being given sufficientopportunities to work with a wide range of reading materials of appropriate difficulty. If thereading materials used in the classroom are too advanced/complex/sophisticated, students mayhave to struggle with decoding and comprehending the content at a literal level and may beunable to process it at higher cognitive levels. It is essential that all students, at whatever levelof academic advancement, are provided with a range of materials corresponding with theirdevelopmental (affective and cognitive) readiness to process the material.

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 21 d

197

From this perspective it is particularly disturbing to note that a significant percentage of teachersfeel they have limited influence over the choice of teaching materials for the reading programand the selection of materials added to the school library. This problem is compounded for alarge number of teachers by the unavailability of qualified teacher-librarians. Inadequate teacherparticipation in the selection of classroom and library resources influences not only theavailability of materials supporting classroom teaching, but also student use of these resources.Lack of access to qualified teacher-librarians further limits the promotion of appropriate readingmaterials and student access to library resources. In the light of these findings, it may not besurprising that only a small majority of students reported using their school or class library toobtain materials for personal interest reading. These data have serious implications for theimplementation of curriculum guidelines regarding the use of a wide range of reading materials.

Teachers reported using a variety of different materials in their teaching of reading/EnglishLanguage Arts; however, they reported using literary materials, particularly novels and shortprose, with greater frequency than other types of texts. This finding may help explain why theliterary items on the grade 11 Reading Assessment resulted in a higher rate of correct andcomplete/partial responses overall than the items relating to other types of text. The assessmentdata indicating that students had the greatest difficulty understanding the expository readingselection (which may have had the least connection with their experience and point of view)suggest that students have insufficient exposure to and/or inadequate strategies for processinga wide range of expository materials. Considering that students most commonly choose materialssuch as magazines and newspapers for their personal interest reading, it is crucial that they learnthe necessary skills to choose materials selectively and the appropriate strategies to read themcritically.

S

According to the assessment results, students are demonstrating some proficiency in identifyingand selecting appropriate strategies for particular reading situations. The results also show,however, that students have considerable difficulty choosing from a range of strategies and haveinadequate conscious awareness of the strategies they need/use in processing various types ofreading materials, particularly expository text. Their deficiencies are most pronounced in relationto stylistic elements of text.

Both the student reading survey data and the teacher survey data provide insight into theemphasis on and use of reading strategies in the reading/English Language Arts classroom. Overhalf the teachers reported a partial or lack of understanding of the "teaching of readingstrategies" and nine-tenths expressed some or great need for professional development on thetopic of "strategies for specific types of text and reading processes including content areareading methods." Furthermore, only about half the teachers stressed the importance of "studentunderstanding and use of specific strategies for reading different types of materials" and"teaching content area reading strategies." Under a third ascribed great importance to "strategyevaluation." A similar picture is evident in the results of the Student Reading Survey in which

2.:1) Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program

198

a significant percentage of students reported making limited independent and/or teacher-facilitated use of strategies which are essential to reading comprehension. It is imperative thatcurriculum leaders address the implications of the limited use of reading strategies, the lowratings given to the teaching and evaluation of reading strategies, and the teachers' expressedneed for assistance in this area.


Careful analysis of the grade 11 Reading Assessment results has led to the followingrecommendations related to curriculum and professional development.

The recommendations outlined below are particularly critical at a time when Manitoba educatorsand students are moving to curriculum-congruent divisional and provincial English LanguageArts examinations. (See Strategies 59 and 62 in Answering the Challenge.)

These recommendations are expected to form the basis for provincial and divisional action plansdesigned to improve reading instruction in Senior Years. Moreover, since the role of admin-istrator as curriculum leader is crucial to effective change, curriculum leaders are expected tosupport teachers in the impl:mentation of the recommendations which follow. The group orgroups targeted by each recommendation is/are identified after each recommendation.

UMWT = TeachersS = SchoolsD = School

DivisionsM a Manitoba


F = Faculties of

I. CURRICULUM Education

A. Development


1. Manitoba Education and Training develop ways to make thecurriculum documents, English Language Arts: OverviewK-12 (1988) and English Language Arts: Grades 9-12(1987), more accessible to teachers who question theirreader-friendliness.


199

T =$ =

LEGEND

TeachersSchools

D = SchoolDivisions

N = ManitobaEducation and

B. ImplementationF le

TrainingFaculties ofEducation



a. curriculum leaders ensure that teachers have access toexisting curriculum documents as well as to newcurriculum support materials as they are released (seebibliography);

b. teachers consult the relevant sections of the variouscurriculum documents and curriculum support materialswhere information related to reading is a focus.Specifically, see:English Language Arts: Overview K-12 (1988), p. 73;English Language Arts: Grades 9-12 (1987), pp. 8, 22,and the specific sections dealing with each grade level;English Language Arts: Senior Years (9-12) (1991), pp.105-116 which specifically and practically deal withdeveloping language through reading;

c. curriculum leaders consult the Checklist forAdministrators found in English Language Arts: OverviewK-12 (1988), pp. 27-29;

2. Student Reading Materials

To ensure the use of a wide variety of appropriate student readingmaterials, it is recommended that:

a. educators broaden the range of student reading materialsthey select for classroom use to include more materialclosely connected with student interest and experience, inparticular considering the needs of female students,minority students, disadvantaged students, etc.;

22,2

S, D

S, D

S,


200

b. school divisions write and implement their own materialsselection policies, with input from teachers, based on themodel provided by Manitoba Education and Training;

c. Manitoba Education and Training examine its materialselection process to ensure that more transactional andjournalistic materials are made available for use at Senior1-4;

d. Manitoba Education and Training include transactionaland journalistic headings in the Manitoba Text BookBureau (MTBB) catalogue at Senior 1, 2, 3 and 4, listingappropriate materials under these headings as they arereviewed and approved/recommended;

e. Manitoba Education and Training make teachers aware(possibly through a note in the MTBB catalogue) that thegrade levels (Senior 1, 2, 3 or 4) for which the materialsare listed in the catalogue (especially novels) aresuggestions only (e.g., teachers may use a Senior 3selection in Senior 2). Schools and divisions shouldexercise discretion/flexibility in using materials wherethey believe they are appropriate for the language goals tobe achieved. Articulation/dialogue between Early, Middleand Senior Years teachers and between grades at theselevels is critical to facilitate this process;

Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program . I )

LEGEND

T s TaacharaS = schoolsD School

DivisionsM w Manitoba


F * Faculties ofEducation

T, S, D, M

M

M

S, D, M

201

LEGEND





f. schools and school divisions be encouraged to review theuse of existing funds for student reading materials takingthe following into consideration:

movement to expenditure of funds for resource-basedlearning; S, D

movement away from purchasing full class sets of atext/title and consider movement toward purchasingseveral copies of several thematically linked titles; and S, D

10movement away from purchasing non-reusableconsumables; S, D

g. curriculum leaders facilitate collaboration betweenteacher-librarians and English Language Arts teachers inthe selection and promotion of student reading materials.

3. Instruction

To ensure recognition of the current levels of students' readingachievements and to ensure continued improvement, it isrecommended that:

a. society (parents, business, industry, government, etc.)recognize and acknowledge that learning related to thecurriculum objectives dealing with meaning vocabularyand literal comprehension seem to have been adequatelyachieved; curriculum leaders should develop a commun-ication strategy to inform society of this achievement;

2 (= 4

S, D


202

b. in recognition of student achievement related to meaningvocabulary and literal comprehension, teachers beencouraged and supported to move instructional time,delivery and focus beyond these levels of achievementtoward instructional strategies for improving inferential,critical-reflective and meta-cognitive achievements;

T TeachersS Schools

* SchoolDivisions

N ManitobaEducation andTraining

F x Faculties ofEducation

T

c. curriculum leaders develop a plan to facilitate 3(b) aboveand develop a communication strategy to inform societyof the move to increased focus on higher order thinkingstrategies; T, S, D, M, F

d. curriculum leaders be encouraged to provide systemicsupport for the paradigm shift which has been, andcontinues to be, required of English Language Artsteachers; S, D, M, F

e. in recognition of the complexity of the challenge withwhich English Language Arts teachers are faced,curriculum leaders be encouraged to support teachers intheir ongoing efforts to deal with that challenge in areassuch as scheduling, class size, preparation time andfinancing resources;

f. teachers facilitate strategies and approaches, experiences,activities and assignments which will challenge studentsto higher level thinking;

g. teachers use a greater range of reading materials andstrategies (a range of difficulty levels and various types oftext, including literary, dramatic, transactional, andjournalistic, ensuring gender balance and multi-culturalrepresentation) and provide students with experience inthe use of a range of materials and strategies;


S, D

T

T, S, D, M, F

h. some teachers redefine and broaden their definition of the"content" of language arts to include a major focus andemphasis on language (specifically, the student's ability touse language), cognition and metacognition;

i. teachers re-examine the essential role of collaborative/interactive learning in the development of language andhigher level thinking skills;

3. teachers facilitate student discussion of their reading(student-student, student-teacher) via informal talk,conferencing, small-group sharing, literature circles andwhole-group/class discussion;

k. teachers and curriculum leaders recognize the importanceof the role of teacher-librarians in reading (languagedevelopment), particularly as schools move towardresource-based learning.



a. curriculum leaders provide teachers with the opportunitiesand support needed to acquire a variety of evaluationstrategies and resources consistent with the goals andobjectives of the curriculum;

b. Manitoba Education and Training give teachers morepractical and specific help with curriculum-congruentevaluation procedures, tools and approaches, recognizingthat these must mesh with the reporting system withinwhich teachers function.

0 r: ri4. c b

203

T = Teachers$ SchoolsD is School

DivisionsM Manitoba



T

T

T


204


Because support for teachers is critical in implementing many of theabove recommendations, it is recommended that:

a. curriculum leaders take an active interest in systematically keepingEnglish Language Arts teachers informed about opportunities forprofessional development;

b. curriculum leaders provide English Language Arts teachers withopportunities for professional development, including professionalreading related to current thinking in reading/language arts;

c. Manitoba Education and Training note in the "TeacherReference" section of the Manitoba Text Book Bureau cataloguethat the materials listed there are included to facilitate teachers'professional development through professional reading.


LEGEND





S, D, M, F

S, D, M, F

205

CHAPTER 11

COMPARISON TESTING

Several comparison studies were conducted in conjunction with the 1992 Reading Assessment.These studies consisted of: the application of a reading continuum rating of grade 4 studentsparticipating in the 1992 Reading Assessment and the re-administration of the 1985 provincialReading Assessment at the four designated grades (3,6,9,12). The data from these comparisonsare reported below.

READING CONTINUUM RATING RESULTS (GRADE 4)

The Reading Continuum Rating component of the 1992 provincial Reading Assessment wasadministered only at grade 4. Its purpose was to obtain information on the reading levels ofgrade 4 students and the extent to which English Language Arts teachers use reading continuain Manitoba schools, and to assess the relationship between teacher ratings of students and theassessment results.

The reading continuum used in the survey was produced in Manitoba by Cochrane, Cochrane,Scalena, and Buchanan (1989). This reading continuum consists of seven stages of readingdevelopment: magical; self-concepting; bridging; take-off; independent; skilled; and advanced.Teachers were provided with two appendices, both of which could be retained for future use:one provided brief descriptions of each of the seven stages of the reading continuum; and theother suggested teaching strategies for use at each of the developmental stages.

Each Manitoba school offering a grade 4 program was provided with one copy of the ReadingContinuum Rating, with instructions to share copies with those hnglish Language Arts teacherswhose students had been selected to participate in the grade 4 provincial Reading Assessment.A list of students in a given class was attached to the survey. A total of 1454 students,representing 612 schools, were included in the sample. (The student sample was the same forboth the Reading Assessment and the Reading Continuum Rating.)

2 2 S


206

On the first page of the survey, teachers were asked to indicate: whether they were familiar withany of the current reading continua such as the one developed by Cochrane, Cochrane, Scalenaand Buchanan; and whether, in their current teaching practice, they regularly place individualstudents on a reading continuum in order to plan appropriate instructional activities for eachchild. At each point, teachers were asked to continue with the survey if their response was"yes." If their response was "no," they were asked to stop at that point and return page oneof the survey along with the non-rated student list. (Teacher responses to items 1 and 2 of thesurvey are reported in Table 95 below.) Only those teachers who answered "yes" to both thefirst and second question were asked to use the reading continuum to rate the current readinglevel of students included on their respective lists.

TABLE 95

TEACHER FAMILIARITY WITH AND USE OF READING CONTINUA

Survey Questions Teacher Responses

TOTALYes No NR

1. Are you familiar with any of the current readingcontinua such as developed by Cochrane, Cochrane, 191 209 0 400

Scalena and Buchanan? (Check one)

2. In your current teaching practice, do you regularlyplace individual students on a reading continuum inorder to plan appropriate instructional activities foreach child? (Check one)

127 104 169 400

* These two questions comprised page 1 of the Reading Continuum Rating.

Of the 612 schools surveyed, 379 returned the Reading Continuum questionnaire. (A total of 400copies of page 1 of the questionnaire were returned. The difference between the two figures isdue to the return of more than one copy of page 1 by some schools.) Although schools wereinstructed to provide ratings only if they answered in the affirmative to both the first and secondquestion, 87 schools offered ratings despite answering "no" to one or both questions. Inaddition, 113 schools answering "yes" to both questions provided ratings. Thus, a total of 200schools provided ratings of students.

The 113 schools reporting both a familiarity with and regular use of current reading continuarated a total of 357 students from the sample of 1454 grade 4 Reading Assessment participants.These students were rated on the basis of the seven-stage reading continuum provided. Thegroup data are reported in Table 96 below.

0 ci4. 4.-


207

TABLE 96

READING CONTINUUM RATING*(Grade 4)

Stages of Reading Continuum Number of Students Percentage of Students

1. Magical 0 0.0%2. Self-Concepting 2 0.63. Bridging 21 5.94. Take-Off 48 13.45. Independent 151 42.36. Skilled 83 23.27. Advanced 52 14.6

TOTAL 357 100%

* Student ratings in the 113 schools indicating familiarity with and regular use of reading continua.

The results of the Reading Continuum Rating indicate that nearly half the teachers (48% ofrespondents) have a knowledge of reading continua but just under a third (32%) actually usethem regularly. While reading continua are recognized as a means of categorizing studentslearning to read, the statistical correlation test conducted accounted for only a small percentage(16%)' of observable differences between teacher placement of students on a reading continuumand the actual test scores. The correlations on the four subtests were as follows: MeaningVocabulary 0.38187; Literal Comprehension 0.42025; Interpretive Comprehension 0.41509; andCritical-Reflective Comprehension 0.43607. All these correlations are positive and highlysignificant (p = .0001). These results should be interpreted cautiously since reading stages mayhave been interpreted differently by different teachers. It is also possible that reading continuaand large scale assessments measure different aspects of reading and cannot be expected tocorrelate to any higher extent.

'proportion of variation in the dependent variable (subtest) explained by the independent variable (continuumscore) equals the square of the correlation between them (r2 = (.4)2 = .16)


208

COMPARISON OF 1985 AND 1992 READING ASSESSMENT RESULTS(GRADES 3, 6, 9, 12)

Comparison testing in reading was conducted in Manitoba schools from May 11 to 15, 1992,using the 1985 provincial Reading Assessment. The 1985 tests (minus the long-answer questions)were re-administered to a random sample of approximately 10% of schools at grades 3, 6, 9 and12 in English language and Franco-Manitoban schools and in the French Immersion program.As in 1985, no distinction was made between the client groups.

The 1985 Reading Assessment was re-administered to determine the degree of change in theachievement of curriculum objectives between 1985 and 1992. Since the initial administrationof the 1985 Reading Assessment there have been changes in school population (for example, asa result of mainstreaming) as well as in teaching emphases and curriculum expectations. Thesefactors need to be considered when reviewing the results of the comparison testing.

Comparisons of the 1985 and 1992 test results for grades 3, 6, 9 and 12 are reported below (seeTables 97, 98, 99, 100). While there are observable differences in subtest achievement at eachgrade level, only two are statistically significant: grade 3, Critical-Reflective Comprehensionsubtest; and grade 6, Study Skills subtest.

TABLE 97

COMPARISON OF 1985 AND 1992 READING ASSESSMENT RESULTSGRADE 3

Mean Raw Score

Number of SignificantSubtest Items 1985 1992 Differences

Meaning Vocabulary 5 4.02 3.96 NoneLiteral Comprehension 15 11.21 10.77 NoneInterpretive Comprehension 20 14.35 13.76 NoneCritical-Reflective Comprehension 2 .83 .66 *

Study Skills 2 1.47 1.40 NoneCloze A 15 8.39 8.59 NoneCloze B 14 11.28 11.32 None

* statistically significant


209

TABLE 98


Mean Raw Score


Meaning Vocabulary 7 3.88 3.66 NoneLiteral Comprehension 12 9.03 9.17 NoneInterpretive Comprehension 13 6.95 6.92 NoneCritical-Reflective Comprehension 7 3.94 3.89 NoneStudy Skills 9 5.22 4.08 *

Cloze 49 26.52 27.24 None

* statistically significant

TABLE 99


Mean Raw Score


Meaning Vocabulary 6 4.70 4.68 NoneLiteral Comprehension 11 7.35 7.04 NoneInterpretive Comprehension 10 6.52 6.49 NoneCritical-Reflective Comprehension 5 2.55 2.55 NoneStudy Skills 5 4.18 4.32 NoneCloze 51 22.01 21.50 None

23


210

TI. LE 100


Mean Raw Score


Meaning Vocabulary 6 4.09 4.08 NoneLiteral Comprehension 10 7.41 7.37 NoneInterpretive Comprehension 16 11.12 10.82 NoneCritical-Reflective Comprehension 4 3.11 3.19 NoneCloze 50 22.93 23.70 None


O

41

211

APPENDIX A

READING ASSESSMENT GRADE 4 PROVINCIAL STUDENT SAMPLEAND RETURN RATES

GRADE 4 - ENGLISH LANGUAGE SCHOOLS (5% SAMPLE)

Total Public I Independent

No. of schools in sample 533 494 39

Enrolment (total population) 12 077 11 401 676No. of students excluded from total 460 449 11

Sample population 605 571 34Sample returned 568

RETURN RATE = 568 = 93.9%605

GRADE 4 - FRANCO-MANITOBAN SCHOOLS (100% SAMPLE)

Total Public Independent

No. of schools in sample 20

Enrolment (total population) 449

No. of students excluded from total 5

Sample population 449

Sample returned 430

RETURN RATE = 430 = 95.8%449

GRADE 4 - FRENCH IMMERSION PROGRAM (25% SAMPLE)


No. of schools in sample 59Arm




Sample returned 456

RETURN RATE = 456 = 97.2%469

212

APPENDIX B

READING ASSESSMENT GRADE 8 PROVINCIAL STUDENT SAMPLEAND RETURN RATES, .



No. of schools in sample 382 342 30

Enrolment (total population) 12 056 11 331 725

No. of students excluded from total 332 328 4

Sample population 601 564 37

Sample returned 540

RETURN RATE = 540 = 89.9%601

GRADE 8 - FRANCO-MANITOBAN_SCHOOLS (100% SAMPLE)






Sample returned 437

RETURN RATE = 437 = 95.8%456



No. of schools in sam Ile 29

Enrolment total ulation 1363



Sample returned 413

RETURN RATE = 413 = 92.6%446

213

APPENDIX CREADING ASSESSMENT GRADE 11 PROVINCIAL STUDENT SAMPLE

AND RETURN RATES



No. of schools in sample* 151 132 19

Enrolment (total population) 9 218 8 555 663

No. of students excluded from total 49 38 11

Sample population 931 865 66

Sample returned 739

RETURN RATE = 739 = 79.4% ELA course options reported: 200, 70%; 201, 21%;not reported, 9%931

* 8 schools were not included because they offered English in Semester 1.

GRADE 11 - FRANCO-MANITOBAN SCHOOLS (100% SAMPLE)


No. of schools in sample* 9




Sample returned 160

RETURN RATE = 160 = 93% Anglais course options reported: 200, 96%;201, 2%; not reported, 2%172

* 3 schools were not included because they offered Anglais in Semester 1.




1




Sample returned 415

RETURN RATE = 415 = 89.4% ELA course options reported: 200, 90%; 201, 6%;not reported, 4%464

9 es 11,5 t) Donr1;nn IG7nni Dmnelbs4 reas.A. 1 .NE4 "

214

APPENDIX D

READING ASSESSMENT TEACHER SURVEYSAMPLE AND RETURN RATES

FL, Franco-Neni CabinFL, French lanenden

GRADE 4

Sample Size Population* SampleNumberReturned

ReturnRate

English 50% 659 305 248 81.3%

FL1 100% 26 22 17 77.3%

FL2 100% 84 87 69 79.3%

TOTAL 414 334 I

GRADE 8

Sample Size Population* SampleNumber

ReturnedReturn

Rate

English 66.6% 571 334 252 75.4%

FL 100% 22 19 16 84.2%

FL2 100% 45 38 29 76.3%

TOTAL 391 297

GRADE 11

Sample Size Population* SampleNumberReturned

ReturnRate

English 75% 386 249 201 80.7%

FL1 100% 16 18 12 66.7%

FL2 100% 54 51 34 66.7%

TOTAL 318 247

All populations were combined

NUMBER RETURNEDTOTAL SAMPLE

for final analysis:

- 247 = 77.7% (return rate)- 318

*Population figures are approximate.


APPENDIX E

PROCEDURES FOR SCORING OPEN-ENDED RESPONSE ITEMS

1992 READING ASSESSMENT (Grades 4, 8, 11)

PURPOSE:

215

To establish inter-rater reliability (i.e. consistency in marking from teacher toteacher) in the use of scoring rubrics prepared for open-ended response items on the1992 Reading Assessment.

I. TEAM ORGANIZATION

A. Team Members

Project Co-ordinator for grades 4, 8 and 11. Grade Level "Ring Master" (1 at each level)

Team Captains/Markers (3 at each level) 1Markers (at each level) J

B. Team Member Job Descriptions

Question Teamsat each level

Project Co-ordinator

knowledgeable about the grade level test, scoring rubric and scoring proceduresconscientious about the need for consistency across the various questions and markers

selects ring master, team captains and markersassigns question to teams for markingco-ordinates training for and marking of the open-ended response items on theassessmentfacilitates initial training sessions for "ring master" and team captainsfloats as trouble shooter during actual scoring sessions

Grade Level "Ring Master"

knowledgeable about the grade level test, scoring rubric and scoring proceduresconscientious about the need for consistency across the various questions and markers

participates in initial training sessions for "ring masters" and team captainsassists team captain in training team markers during scoring sessions

0 `4 84.- , ,


216

checks scoring of every 10th paper to ensure consistency of markingreconvenes marking team(s) as necessary to review problematic/inconsistentscoringfacilitates movement of grade level student papers across question teamsfacilitates movement of scored student papers to coding co-ordinator/teamacts as "first line" grade-level-trouble-shooter and discusses scoringchanges/modifications, problem areas, frustrations, with project co-ordinatorconvenes team debriefing near the end of each scoring session to discuss problemareas, frustrations, etc.

Grade Level Team Captains/Markers

familiar with grade level test, scoring rubric and scoring proceduresknowledgeable about test questions, scoring rubric and scoring procedures forquestions assigned to his/her team.

conscientious about the need for consistency across the various questions andmarkersparticipates in initial training sessions for "ring masters" and team captainstrains the "question team" beginning at the first scoring sessionscores and works as a member of the "question team" on the questions assignedto his/her team, being sensitive to team needs to reconvene/discuss/refocus/regainconsistency, etc, in scoring a particular questionkeeps "ring master" informed of any problem areas, etc.participates in team debriefing near the end of each scoring session to discussproblem areas, frustrations, etc.

Grade Level Questions Teams

knowledgeable about test questions, scoring rubric and scoring procedures forquestions assigned to his/her teamconscientious about the need for consistency across the various questions and markers

participates in training session prior to scoring each questionscores questions assigned to team (all team members score the same question atthe same time)asks to reconvene as a group to discuss/refocus/regain consistency, etc, in scoringa particular question if necessarykeeps team captain informed of any problem areas, etc.participates in team debriefing near the end of each scoring session to discussproblem areas, frustrations, etc.


217

II. TRAINING FOR RING MASTERS AND TEAM CAPTAINS

. facilitated by the project coordinatoroccurs prior to first scoring session by grade levelprior to training session, project co-ordinator randomly selects 20 student papers; theproject co-ordinator should review these papers to ensure that each level of thescoring rubric is representedcopy the 20 papers so that each trainee (the ring leader and the three team captains)receives a complete package of the randomly selected student papersreview, question by question (i.e., working with only one question at a time), thequestion, the scoring rubric and the scoring procedure for that questiondiscuss/allow time for questionsusing scoring rubric (scoring key), score the first question in five of the randomlyselected student papersreview the scores assigned by the trainees for consistencyevaluate/discuss/adjust for any inconsistencies/re-evaluate/re-check for consistencyscore the first question in five more of the randomly selected student papersevaluate/discuss/adjust for any inconsistencies/re-evaluate/re-check for consistencyif consistency across the trainees is strong on the first question, proceed to thesecond questionif consistency is weak, repeat the procedure with additional randomly selected studentpapers until consistency is achievedrepeat procedure for each of the open-ended questions, using the specific rubrics(scoring key) for scoringdiscuss training/management procedures for working with the question teams forscoringassign each team captain the questions his/her team will be responsible for as wellas his/her question team members

III. TRAINING FOR QUESTION TEAMS

facilitated by the team captainsshare with team the open-ended questions it will be responsible for scoringtraining occurs during the scoring process

Prior to the training session, project co-ordinator randomly selects 20 studentpapers; the project co-ordinator should review the papers to ensure that each levelof the scoring rubric is represented (note: these may be the same random samplesused to train the "ring master" and team captains)

copy the 20 papers so that each trainee (ring master, team captains (3), and scorer(6) = 10 at each grade) receives a complete package of the randomly selectedstudent papers


218

working with the first question assigned to the team, review the question and thescoring rubric for that question (scoring key)

41 discussusing five of the randomly selected student papers, score the first questions assignedto the question team (using scoring rubric for that question)review scores across the question team, checking for consistencyevaluate/discuss/adjust for any inconsistencies/re-evaluate/re-check for consistencyif necessary, score the first question using five different randomly selected studentPapersif consistency across the team is strong on that question, proceed to score thequestion in all of the actual student papersif consistency across the team is weak on the question, repeat the procedure outlinedabove with additional randomly selected student papers working until consistency isachieved then score that question in all of the actual student papersif consistency issues arise as the actual scoring occurs, discuss, etc. (may need to re-score any student papers where consistency has been problematic)repeat process for each question assigned to the question team until all questions andall student papers have been scored


9 41

I

APPENDIX F

MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEEGrade 4 Test Development (to June 1992)

Gestny Ewart College universitaire de Saint-Boniface

Shirley Hogue Frontier School Division #48

Irene Huggins Morris MacDonald School Division #19

Wayne Kroetsch Western School Division #47

Lucille Phaneuf St. Boniface School Division #4

Gayle Robertson Winnipeg School Division #1

Noni Struthers Swan Valley School Division #35

Dale Severyn Contractor (test development)Brandon School Division #40

from Manitoba Education and Training

Karmen Gill

Rae Harris

Pat MacDonald

Ernest Molgat

Florence Paynter

Doreen Yamashita

Curriculum AssessmentCurriculum Services Branch

Early YearsCurriculum Services Branch

English Language ArtsCurriculum Services Branch


Early Childhood EducationNative Education Branch

Special EducationChild Care and Development Branch

242

219


220

MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEEGrade 4 Report Writing (from July 1992)

Shirley Adam Fort Garry School Division #5

Gestny Ewart College universitaire de Saint-Boniface

Beverly Hardy Transcona Springfield School Division #12

Gwen McFadyen Transcona Springfield School Division #12

Gilbert Perrin St. Boniface School Division #4

Lucille Phaneuf St. Boniface School Division #4

Susan Rempel Letkemann Report Writer


Karmen Gill

Rae Harris

Pat MacDonald

Ernest Molgat


F2 rly YearsCurriculum Services Branch



0 ,^ 34 1. 4)


221

APPENDIX G

MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE GRADE 8

Jim Frye Lord Selkirk School Division #11

Nancy Gates St. Vital School Division #6

Connie Graham St. Vital School Division #6(till June 1992)

Jocelyne Hupe Seine River School Division #14

Roger Landry St. Boniface School Division #4

Gwen Merrick Post Secondary Preparation Program(till June 1992) Central Park Learning Centre

Tim Pechey River East School Division #9(from July 1992)

Noreen Rossnagel Contractor (test development)Transcona-Springfield School Division #12

Susan Rempel Letkemann Report Writer(from July 1992)


Karmen Gill

Pat MacDonald

Ernest Molgat

'44





222

APPENDIX H

MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE GRADE 11

Bob Bilan Assiniboine South School Division #3

Pat Fenske Lord Selkirk School Division #11

Karen Guenther Seven Oaks School Division #10(until June 1992)

Wayne Selby St. Boniface School Division #4

Gisele Vielfaure Seine River School Division #14

Don Bewell Contractor (test development)

Susan Rempel Letkemann Report Writer(from July 1992)


Karmen Gill

Pat MacDonald

Ernest Molgat




Reading Final Report, French Immersion Program 1rt "4. q )

4

BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY SOURCES

223

English Language Arts Curriculum Documents

Manitoba Education and Training. Anglais niveaux 3-4: FL,. Winnipeg, MB: Bureau del'education francaise, 1985.

---. Curriculum Guide: Grades 1-2-3-4: FL,. Winnipeg: Bureau de l'education francaise, 1985.

--. English Language Arts: Early Years. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services Branch, 1982.

---. English Language Arts: Grades 9-12. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, 1987.

---. English Language Arts: Middle Years. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, 1982.

---. English Language Arts: Overview K--12. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, 1988.

---. English Language Arts: Senior One Guidelines. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, 1991.

--. English Language Arts: Senior Years 9-12. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, 1991.

--. English Language Arts: Writing Evaluation Portfolios (Senior 1). Winnipeg: CurriculumServices, 1991

--. Middle Years Source Book. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, 1984.

---. Programme d'etudes: Anglais niveaux 7-8 FL,. Winnipeg: Bureau de Peducation francaise,1987.

In Press

---. English Language Arts: Differentiating Teaching and Learning in Senior 1 and 2. Winnipeg:Curriculum Services, in press.

--. Implementing Senior I and 2 English Language Arts: A Resource for Teachers andAdministrators. Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, in press.

--. Strategic Instruction: Differentiating Teaching and Learning Across the Curriculum 1-4(Senior 1-4). Winnipeg: Curriculum Services, in press.

Other Government Publications

---. Answering the Challenge: Strategies pr. Success in Manitoba High Schools. Winnipeg:Manitoba Education and Training, 1990

--. Instructional Resources Branch: Selection Policy. Winnipeg: Manitoba Education andTraining, 1989.

---. School Library Policy Statement. Winnipeg. Manitoba Education and Training, 1991.

---. Selection of Learning Resources: Policies and Procedures Pr Manitoba Schools. Winnipeg:Manitoba Education and Training, 1990

--. Using Assessment Results. Published with the sanction of the Joint Committee on Evaluation.Winnipeg: Manitoba Education and Training, n.d.


224

READING ASSESSMENT SOURCES

Reading Continuum (Grade 4)

Cochrane, Orin, Donna Cochrane, Sharen Scalena, and Ethel Buchanan. Reading, Writing andCaring. Winnipeg, MB: Whole Language Consultants Ltd., 1989.

Assessment Reading Materials

Grade 4

Aragon, Jane Chelsea. Salt Hands. New York, NY: E. P. Dutton, 1989.

Fort Whyte Centre. "On the Trail . . . ." Brochure information. Winnipeg, MB.

George, Lyndsay Barrett. William and Boomer . New York, NY: Greenwillow Books, 1987.

Heidbreder, Robert. "Polar Bear Snow." Don't Eat Spiders. Don Mills, ON: Oxford UniversityPress, 1985. 31.

Grade 8

Conford, Ellen. "What Do I Do Now?" If This Is Love, I'll Take Spaghetti. Galaxies II. DonMills, ON: Addison-Wesley Publishers Ltd., 1991. 66-75.

Keyes, Ralph. Chancing It: Why We Take Risks. New York, NY: Sterling Lord Literistic, Inc.,1985. 111-113, 114, 168.

Leichner, Pierre, John Arnett, Joseph S. Rallo, Suja Srikameswaran, and Brent Vulcano. "AnEpidemiologic Study of Maladaptive Eating Attitudes in Canadian School Age Population."International Journal of Eating Disorders 5.6 (1986): 969-982.

Patterson, Bruce. Canadians on Everest. Calgary, AB: Detselig Enterprises Ltd., 1990. 6, 9,10, 228.

Pittman, Al. "Cooks Brook." In Context. Anthology Two. Eds. Clayton Graves and ChristineMcClymont. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Canada, 1990. 330.

Grade 11

Brooks, Martha. "What I Want to Be When I Grow Up." Paradise Café and Other Stories.Saskatoon, SK: Thistledown Press Ltd., 1988. 41-48.

Ebeling, Debbie. "Peer Group Prosecution." In Overdrive (Destinations). Scarborough, ON:Prentice-Hall Canada Inc., 1991. 136-137.


2 4 7

225

Harwood, Suzanne P. "Full Moons and White Men." In Prose: Short Forms. Scarborough, ON:Prentice-Hall Canada Inc., 1990. 28-30.

Johnstone, Frederick. "People Cause Discrimination." Canada and the Worki Dec. 1977: 12.

Sorestad, Glen. "Cold Bus Ride." In Overdrive ;Destinations). Scarborough, ON: Prentice-HallCanada Inc., 1991. 180.


Date post:	19-Aug-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times